Solving Sexism In the Lindy Hop Community

Note: This post is a detour from my planned 3-post series I began in my previous post.

Tired of sexism in the lindy hop community? Me too! Let’s do something about it.

Lately there’s been a lot of talk about sexism on lindy hop blogs and Facebook. This is very encouraging. Change is a-brewin’, isn’t it? And women must continue working at the forefront to make it happen.

I’m assuming we all understand what’s wrong with sexism. This whole post is devoted to discussing solutions for the lindy hop community. Let’s move the discourse forward! I’ll be happy to read your ideas in the comments.

I’ve seen three main suggestions on how to address sexism in the lindy hop community:

Take the Philippines, for example. They don’t have separate words for he and she. Their pronoun “siya” (pronounced “shya”) is non-gendered. It refers to either he or she, depending on context. My Filipino husband, Paul, moved to the U.S. at the age of 23. He tells me his culture is quite sexist. Paul thinks this is because there are many sexist messages present elsewhere in culture, and also because you can easily infer gender from context.

Paul said people would assume “leader” means man and “follower” means woman—even when you do not specify gender, and even if you never say “men” and “women.” How would we limit the effects of sexism in a Filipino partner dance classroom? I asked him.

He said we’d need to be much more explicitly non-sexist. We’d need to subvert the many other sexist messages present elsewhere in the dance (and culture).

Learning Both Roles: A Giant Step Forward

In most of the lindy hop world, women are strongly expected to follow and men strongly expected to lead. Learning both roles can go a long way toward opening up opportunities to everyone. Socially, more women might choose to lead, and more men might choose to follow.

If everyone dances both roles, we can understand and accommodate our partners better, whatever role we choose.

Still, I don’t think this goes far enough, either. Women are expected to follow because the role is considered feminine. Men are expected to lead because the role is considered masculine. So long as the roles are gendered and sexist messages prevail elsewhere in our culture, we will continue to mostly fall back into these roles along gender lines.

It’s possible (perhaps likely) that the gendered-ness of the roles will fade over time. If lots of people practice both regularly, I expect the lines between masculine and feminine to blur and equalize.

But I think we can make this happen more quickly by being even more explicitly non-sexist.

Equal-Opportunity Connection: The Linchpin Solution

Instead of hoping people will get the point of non-gendered language or learning both dance roles, we must also teach them to not be sexist in their dancing. I suggest teaching and learning gender-neutral leading/following, or what I like to call equal-opportunity connection.

Currently in lindy hop, we are taught to communicate with each other in very gendered ways:

Masculine/dominant characteristics are associated with the lead role.

Feminine/submissive characteristics are associated with the follow role.

When explaining connection, I used to teach follows to give up control, to not “back lead” or “hijack” or do anything independently of their partner’s directions. I taught leads to be powerful, take charge, and give clear directions.

This is problematic. Even if people switch roles, they are still expected to conform to the gendered expectations of that role.

I’ve long been troubled by this, even as I was spreading it. For those of us who would like to be equals to our partner, this language rankles:

“If you lead clearly, she has no choice but to do it.”

“Make her do what you want.”

“The follow is like a shopping cart.”

“The lead is like the driver of a car.”

“Never hijack. Leads find it irritating.”

“You can add your own footwork, but it must not interfere with the lead.”

“You can choose to do something different, but the lead has ultimate veto power.”

In our platonic and romantic relationships, we don’t usually tolerate these kinds of highly gendered expectations. The dance world, it seems, has not caught up.

It’s true that people can be masculine, feminine, a combination, anywhere in between or something else entirely. But dance roles are not inherently anything, nor do they need us to ascribe masculine or feminine characteristics to them in order to make partner dancing work.

Lead does not need to mean “in control.” Follow does not need to mean “giving up control.” These expectations, and anything approaching them, are mechanically unnecessary, illogical, and creatively limiting. This unfairly restricts all new dancers who are taught to associate gendered dominant/submissive traits with lead and follow.

I’ve specialized in dancing the follow role for 8 years. Guess what? I am not submissive!

Nor do I wish to be dominant. So no, I will not spend the next several years becoming a more refined lead. I want an equal opportunity to express myself and be heard in my chosen role. Plenty of people already understand equality of dance roles. Let’s spread that to everyone.

Let’s kick the gendered concepts out of leading and following.

For all the lip service we give to lead and follow being equal, you’d think we’d actually get more progress on that. I’m tired of talk. Let’s play this game, already! Let’s actually practice equality.

Since the way we relate to each other is critically important, I chose the phrase “equal-opportunity connection.” Equality of communication is the key concept here, and science backs this up. Biology doesn’t dictate that men must be in charge. The biological differences between men and women have literally nothing to do with whether and to what extent we share decision-making during social dancing. Especially since—reality check!—I can dance with a person of any gender.

I’ve observed a huge variety of ways and degrees to which follows take initiative and leads are influenced by follows. Every partnership makes decisions differently. It’s even fine for the follow to be in charge! No one can erase that reality by defining it away, saying it’s wrong, or even by teaching hordes of newbies their limiting definition.

And since, to my knowledge, nobody is nursing a child or lifting weights while lindy hopping, we have run out of ways to blame biology for our sexism.

By acknowledging and practicing the reality of shared decision-making, we can be equals not just in theory but in real life. Our (Western) culture has grown a lot in accepting that there are many different ways to have relationships. Why, in dancing, do we still steer people into very narrow roles?

Partner Dancing Is a Conversation

Sometimes you take turns talking and listening. Sometimes you interject. Sometimes one person talks for a while. Sometimes the chatter goes quiet and you have only body language. It’s possible for one person to dominate the conversation while the other just nods their head—but those aren’t the best conversations, are they?

By learning to BOTH take initiative with AND be responsive to your partner, you open up the maximum amount of possibilities. In one dance you might share decision-making 50/50. In another dance, you might let your partner take the creative lead.

When you have equal opportunity, you do not have to iron yourself into narrow dominant or submissive roles. You can do whatever works for you in the moment. That is what equality looks like. That is liberation.

I think another contributing factor is when there is an aspect of raunchiness in the dance, especially for performances like Jack&Jill, Jack&Jack, etc. Putting overt sexuality in the dance makes it much more difficult to see the roles as able to be danced by either gender. I don’t have a solution for this issue; I have just avoided these competitions (even watching them) in my area since bawdiness is more rewarded & valued than good dancing.

Sarah

I have encountered the exact same thing. My friends and I were excited to showcase our switch-ability in a “same-sex” dance competition at a big event, but I realized quickly that what was assumed to go hand-in-hand with two women or two men dancing with each other was an overt sexual performance.

I am totally 100% not okay with a) performing in an overt sexual way with anyone regardless of their gender or relationship to me* and b) the fetishization of queerness.

*(What I mean to say here, is that I would not have participated in a competition if I had known this was the expectation. I entered the context believing it would be like most of our other Lindy Hop contents – I did not bring in the assumption that same-sex = sexualized performance.)

And I agree – most of the time, the crowd/judges reward the couple who is the most daring and/or explicit and rarely rewards good dancing.

These competitions always seemed quite out of place to me and it felt like it put my everyday dances with other women in a very strange context.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

Oh my gosh, I hate comps like that. It’s like partner dancing makes it okay to be sexist or something. “Because it’s tradition!” Or, “We’re just playing around; I’m not sexist in real life!”

Right. Dancing is real life. The things you are doing on the dance floor are actually happening. Just because we tolerated it in the past doesn’t mean we need to continue.

Anonymous

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Solving sexism is not about “fixing” the lead/follow structure of the dance.

“If you lead clearly, she has no choice but to do it.” is sexist and wrong. The more correct phrase would be “If you lead clearly, the follow has no choice but to do it.”. This takes out the sexist part, but still a clear lead does not mean no choice, it just means that it’s clear what the lead wants the follow to do. If the follow chooses not to do it, then that person is quite simply not following. When driving, a red stoplight clearly indicates that you should stop, but it’s your choice whether or not you actually decide to. If you choose not to, you are breaking the structure that has been setup.

Similarly “You can add your own footwork, but it must not interfere with the lead.” … if you do something that interferes with the lead, then you are no longer following. I could go through the others too, but you get my drift.

I am all about equal opportunity between sexes, races, gender identities and so on, but this is a lead/follow dance not a half-lead-half-follow/half-follow-half-lead dance. If you want to stop following, that’s fine, but do it because you want to lead, or dance solo, or you want to take up another dance style, not because you are trying to make a stand against sexism.

Trying to lead a follow who thinks they shouldn’t have to follow sucks, as does trying to follow a lead who feels like they don’t have to lead.

marty rawls

You are asking, in part, to change the dance itself. It is a partner dance, with a lead and a follow. If it lasts for a phrase, a song, a night, or a lifetime; someone should be the lead and someone should be the follow. The basic structure of the dance itself requires this. If you dont want to be a ‘follow’ then you should lead, or find a new dance, or do solo.

You mentioned ‘conversation’ and ‘call and response.’ Those are all still possible with the lead/follow structure.

As you have even mentioned in your blog, some people come to Lindy to meet people to couple with. If you are straight, it works best to have male lead and female follow. This gives you the most interaction with those likely to also be looking for a new SO/ONS/FWB/etc of your gender. And most people are straight, so it’s likely this trend will continue.

Even at LBGT dances i see the obvious dominant/masculine dancer in the lead position more often than not. If the LBGT dancers are still dancing in gender(?) roles, perhaps sexism doesn’t need to be solved this way.

I appreciate and agree with the push to eradicate sexism. But it can seem like aiming at changing the way a partner dance is performed isn’t helpful, its more ROLEism than SEXism.

Though, for a sexism fix. I still see more men asking women to dance, than the reverse. regardless of role on the dance floor. The expectation of males making the request is legit sexism.

marty rawls

ugh, meant to main reply this. not comment reply.

i am an idiot.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

“The basic structure of the dance itself requires this.” You are so dead wrong, and I can only imagine you aren’t an advanced dancer. I have no idea why men continue to spout bullshit about why, in a group of exactly 2 people, one of them must be in charge. In most of my dances, I share decision making. Any one can learn.

“the follow has no choice” Also, completely and totally dead wrong. Follows control their own bodies. They have ultimate control over what they decide to do and how they decide to interpret their partner’s movements. Teaching anything else subordinates the follows, and I won’t stand for that.

This conversation is over. Any further off-topic comments defending gendered dance roles will be deleted. You can email me if you wish to continue talking.

Anonymous

Did you miss the context of “the follow has no choice”? It was the modified quote from your original post, but was not saying that it should be say, it was saying that replacing “she” (from your post) with “follow” takes out the sexist part, but the main point was a clear lead is not about removing choice from the follow, it’s about being clear about what you are asking.

Teaching a follow not to follow subordinates the dance. Would you teach a lead not to lead? Note: I am not defending gendered dance, just trying to understand what you have against set and clearly defined roles, once the sexism is removed.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

Got it. The roles are clearly defined in that the lead and follow do different steps. But then we add on this gendered bit: “Lead” is conflated with “initiator” (the more dominant one) and “follow” is conflated with “responder” (the more submissive one). In reality, both roles do both things. If you don’t learn both, you end up dancing a very lead-centered dance.

That’s what sexist about the way the roles are defined. It’s highly gendered. The more you break down the submissive/dominant expectations for each role, the less gendered the roles will be.

Anonymous

Thinking that “steps” are defined in the roles of leading and following is (to me) a sign of a not advanced dancer. A great dancer does not need to pay any attention to steps. A good dancer can lead with follow footwork or follow entirely well without using any footwork that is taught to follows.

The role of lead is exactly that – the initiator. If the follow is initiating, then they are leading, so let me rephrase – why is having a dominant and a submissive role sexist, once you remove the association of male with dominant and female with submissive?

Where do you think the ideas of dominant and submissive came from? Thin air? They’re not mechanically necessary, which you’d know if you worked on it in your dancing. Men are traditionally leads, and women traditionally follows. Dominance is a masculine trait, and submissiveness is a feminine trait. Saying women can lead if they want is pure lip service. So long as women are expected to be feminine, and the follow role associated with feminine traits, women will continue being mostly follows.

And now the iron fist comes down. Please email me your further comments.

Nancy

This conversation is over because I refuse to have a conversation about an issue I brought up? it’s not off topic, it’s a response to an article you wrote. Either defend your position or don’t but right now all you are doing is censoring.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

@Nancy – I’m confused. You haven’t left a comment yet; to what are you replying?

Also quick note–freedom of speech is not protected on private websites. In the post I asked that comments be about discussing solutions. Some people have argued wether gendered dance roles are actually a problem; this is off topic.

http://cazort.net Alex Zorach

I don’t agree with this. I’ve had some dances where, at any one point in time, it wasn’t even clear who was leading and who was following. Sometimes one person is clearly in one role, and the other in the other, but it’s not. I think there’s a whole continuum between a strict lead/follow relationship and a more muddled one–and muddled doesn’t necessarily mean the dance won’t be fun and look good. One of my favorite dances ever was one where nearly the whole dance, it didn’t feel like I was leading or following.

I also don’t agree that having men as leads and women as follows is best for straight couples. I’m a straight male who likes to break a lot of gender norms and I have often really enjoyed both dancing with men when I was dancing as a follow, and dancing with women who were leading when I was following. I think this is true for me, EVEN when I’ve been single and looking.

I think having a dance scene being more “gender free” would be attractive to me because I connect with people (both as friends and romantic partners) who are more open to flexibility in gender roles. I feel much more comfy in that sort of environment.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

“I feel much more comfy in that sort of environment.” Me too! I think that’s the whole point, actually. Those of us who are more “flexible” shouldn’t be expected to conform to other’s gender expectations. If someone wants dance traditionally, that’s fine. But that doesn’t mean everyone else needs to.

I like the idea of teaching gender-free dance roles as a “blank canvas” that you can add your own flavor to.

marty rawls

gender free and role free a two different things.

from the comments, i see a lot of people seem to agree that Lead/Follow isn’t inherently sexist, but that how we default assign men to lead and women to follow as sexist.

IMO, a sexism free dancefloor is one where anyone, regardless of gender/orientation, is able to jump in the role that makes them most happy without social constraints. Then we gotta figure out a better way to ask people to dance, else it might get uncomfortable “Do you want to dance?” and both dancers go to get in follow position, because neither really wanted to lead.

Josephine

This. Or both go for lead position. Not that either of those things is the end of the world, but it’s cool try to minimize awkwardness.

And I’d love it if we started coming up with a good way to do the asking-for-a-dance that takes this into account. With a couple of women-who-lead whom I know well, I sometimes go up and ask them “You want to lead me?” but I’m not sure that works for everyone, or for people you don’t know, etc. I would love to know what other people do.

Josephine

The “this” was for: gender free and role free are two different things.

Brandi

Yes! that’s a whole other thing that gets left out a lot. I’m a woman, I love dancing with men, I love leading. I really love leading men, and there is now a handful of men in my scene who will follow me.

Tanya Taylor

Point well made about men being expected to ask women to dance! I often ask men to dance and get looks of astonishment. I also have friends who refuse to ask a man they don’t know to dance. My philosophy is, why sit out waiting to be asked, letting others control my night. Like someone else stated, it’s about enjoying the dance and I can’t enjoy it if I’m not on the dance floor!

Tanya Taylor

Great point about men being expected to ask women to dance! I often ask men to dance and receive looks of astonishment. I also have friends who refuse to ask a man they do not know to dance. My philosophy is why sit out waiting to be asked, letting others dictate my night? If no one asks me and I feel like dancing, I will approach someone who also is not dancing. As someone else stated, it’s all about the dance…I can’t enjoy the dance if I’m not on the dance floor.

Brandi

“Some people come to Lindy to meet people to couple with. If you are straight, it works best to have male lead and female follow. This gives you the most interaction with those likely to also be looking for a new SO/ONS/FWB/etc of your gender. And most people are straight, so it’s likely this trend will continue.”

While social dancing is a great place to meet people for romantic relationships, I feel the emphasis is toward social, and not all of my social interactions are driven by the desire to couple up. We’ve all known people who only come out to their friends parties to meet someone. It’s generally distasteful. I feel the same way about people who come dancing for the same reason. I’m saddened and bothered by the thought of such people, and actively vexed by the presence of people who are transparently searching.
I don’t limit my social interactions to people I’m interested in for romance, why would I want to limit my dance time?

Josephine

Yeah, I’m not down with the romance-seeking justification, for precisely those reasons. Besides, I don’t think the dance roles *need* that justification.

http://www.dancekepler.com Max Kepler

As someone who leads and follows (in lindy hop and Argentine tango, dancing and studying both since 1997 and teaching professionally since the early 2000’s), I feel sad when I hear suggestions such as, “If you lead clearly, the follow has no choice but to do it,” because having no choice but to do something that is led is not a way that I prefer to dance (or interact with people in life). I also feel uncomfortable when I hear people being labeled as “leads” and “follows,” though I acknowledge that I sometimes do this myself, out of habit, and/or as shorthand.

I think I would prefer statements such as:
“If I suggest a (direction/feeling/movement/idea) with clear intention to my dance partner, I hope that my partner will (take up my suggestion/run with it/follow along/be inspired/enjoy it/get a chuckle out of it) if and only if my partner feels safe and comfortable and happy to do so, and then perhaps suggest something back to me that I can (be inspired by/enjoy/get a chuckle out of/etc), because I want to connect with my dance partners in a mutually-fun and creative way, sharing and learning from each other in both directions, and having a generally awesome time.”

But that’s just me. (Or is it?)

Additionally, I’d like to add:
If my dance partner suggests a (direction/feeling/movement/idea) to me with clear intention, I will generally do my best to (take up their suggestion/run with it/follow along) if I feel safe and comfortable doing so, because I like to be in flow with my dance partners, and I enjoy experiencing others’ ideas and musical interpretations. Occasionally (not often, because I prefer not to interrupt the flow), I will willfully (or sometimes accidentally!) disregard my partner’s suggestion and do something wacky in order to add (humor/the element of surprise/variety) to the dance. I try to only do this if my partner seems open to it, but sometimes I guess incorrectly (and sometimes my mischievous side gets the better of me).

Sarah

First I just want to acknowledge and thank those dancers who are doing good work to combat sexism in there own spheres of influence, as well as anyone speaking up for a better community online, publicly or in small circles. It’s not always visible to the larger scene, but it’s important. And speaking up and acting out always carry with it a risk of being ostracized. So thank you to Rebecca and thanks to everyone else.

Second, Rebecca, you’ve created another fine article with some ideas that I hadn’t heard before, especially the limited effect of gender-neutral language. Not only should we go gender-neutral, but pro-equality in our words!

I totally agree with you that the lead/follow structure of the dance CAN TOTALLY BE MAINTAINED even as we disrupt sexist and heteronomrative ways of defining them. How do I know? Because it is already happening all the time. These dancers, these dances already exist. We just need to shine a light on them and teach them.

Karen

One thing that I think can help with the sexism is more focus on teaching both leads and followers during classes and workshops. And not just “leads let me teach you all of these cool moves and followers just do exactly what the leads tell you”. I’ve found that having someone give me something specific to work on in a move, or teaching a move where the followers feedback helps both partners to get it, and encouraging that discussion between partners really helps followers to feel like they have more worth in the dance.

Also I think treating the dance as more of a conversation between partners is good. Leaders should lead, and followers should try to follow what they lead, but sometimes the lead doesn’t send the signal that they meant to or a follower messes up and so leads should learn to respond to what the follower actually does. This isn’t an invitation for follows to hijack or anything, but it should leave it more open for us to have a little fun with it if the leads aren’t caught completely off guard by us not doing things exactly as they expect.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

Re: Hijacking. If you mean follows ignoring their partner, then that’s just as bad as leads ignoring their partner. The only thing that’s “wrong” with hijacking is that leads don’t know how to be responsive. When they do, hijacking is just partner dancing. We don’t even need to give it a funny name. :-)

Anonymous

As a lead, one of the most frustrating things about hijacking is that it is frequently done poorly. I’m not against it per se, but you can’t just decide to stop following and do your own thing, you have to lead the hijack and be present enough in the conversation to know when a good time to do it is, just as it would be rude to interrupt a conversation mid-sentence with something irrelevant, but it’s fine to add something at the end of a sentence that adds to the discussion or even steers it in a new direction.

In my experience, most leads respond well to a well executed hijack. Not knowing how to respond is usually a result of a hijack that comes from nowhere and is unexpected.

Sarah

Yes, agreed! The word ‘hijack’ seemed to give the behavior a disruptive or uncooperative feel when really, it’s just a follow initiating something. It doesn’t need a special word. :)

I teach a beginner dance class from time to time here, and I’m always sure to show how moves can be initiated by either partner.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

I’m compiling a list of terms to replace when you’re teaching non-gendered dance roles / equal-opportunity connection. “Hijack” is totally on there. Also “back lead.” It’s just initiating! We don’t need another word, especially one that’s considered negative like that.

Josh

Usually when I hear “back lead” it’s in the context of follows anticipating the lead too early and performing whatever move it is on their own. This absolutely destroys any connection and is usually the sign of a beginner follow. It’s the conversational equivalent of interrupting the other person to inject your own opinion of what you think they’re saying. A lot of the time the lead may be saying something totally different but the follow didn’t let it finish. This is the context that I usually hear “Don’t back-lead”

There are other times I’ve heard the term used to refer to the follow making an adjustment to the dance, but in that context it’s never used negatively. This is usually things like pacing, pulse, or heaviness. E.g. “If you are having trouble finding a common rhythm, try back-leading a stronger pulse.” It does have a subtle implication that the lead is supposed to set these things and the follow is supposed to match, but more advanced dancers know that both sides match each other. It’s just tougher for beginners to understand that complexity when they’re still struggling to understand the basics of connection.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

@Josh – It only “destroys the connection” if the lead hasn’t been taught to be responsive. But it’s totally true that “back leading” can be a sign that the follow isn’t good at responding yet. We don’t need a separate term for “not good at responding.” As you said, the term “back leading” suggests follows should mainly focus on being responsive.

Josh

If I’m trying to lead a swingout that comes in on 2 or 3 and she’s already coming in on 1, no matter how quickly I respond there’s going to be a moment where we lose connection. On future swingouts, though, a good lead will probably adapt to compensate in a social setting or J&J (possibly not in a classroom setting).

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

@Josh – (a) It’s not the end of the world if you lose connection. And (b) when I lead, unless the follow is totally screwing with me, I can maintain connection whether the follow comes in on 1 or 7 or something in between. But then, I’ve really worked the skill of responding. It does take practice.

Josh

I was more trying to illustrate exactly what I meant by “back leading” since there’s a myriad of definitions. Leads should definitely be responsive, and I think the concept of “following your follow” doesn’t get taught early or often enough. Conversation is a big part of social dancing, but it means paying attention to your partner no matter what role you’re in.

Josh

Also for the context of “back-leading” as “making an adjustment” I usually phrase it as “try asking for [more tension/more pulse/etc.]” and that phrasing works for both leads and follows. It also fits the conversation metaphor better.

Lexie

I once did a styling that a lead was not expecting, and he said, “Oh! A hijack. I see. I can dig it.”

I just smiled, but what I should have said, “No, that was a styling. If I hijack, you’ll effing know it.”

Benjamin Wiodham

I’m not sure Lindy-Hop was ever intended to be a sexist dance to begin with. There is one video in particular that reveals that Lindy-Hop is about dancing, not about gender roles. The video featured navy officers dancing with each other (two guys) and there was no connotation of that ever having any homosexual implications. There were virtually no women on the dance floor in this video. I also feel like the differences between men and women should be honored, instead of entirely ignored, or used against the other gender for political gain. I do both lead and follow but the truth is, I will never look as good as a female doing swivels when I do swivels because women are really just better at looking good. At the same time, no woman will ever be as smooth as Peter Strom on the dance floor when it comes to leading. I can’t pinpoint exactly what makes those things true, but they just are, and I feel like ignoring those differences is just forcing people to be politically correct when they could be so much more expressive than that. We should celebrate the differences between men and women. Men and women are not the same, but so what? Women are awesome because they are different than men. Removing pronouns from the equation to make people feel better will not change that.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

When everyone has complete freedom to lead or follow, and initiate or respond in their chosen role, THEN people can honor their own gender the way THEY wish, instead of bending themselves to fit our community’s expectations. Be masculine, be feminine, be something else entirely. I don’t care. But it’s not okay to expect people to act or look a certain way because of narrow expectations.

BTDubs, women “look better swiveling” because they practice it more. Also, you are probably heterosexual and enjoy their hip movement. I’m also straight, but I really LOVE when masculine men do great swivels. But my preference doesn’t mean that every male should be masculine and do swivels. Your preferences and your gender ideals don’t apply to everyone, either. What we need is freedom of choice, which we do not currently have.

If you’d like to continue debating this, please email me. This thread is reserved for talking about solutions.

Josh

Case in point: Thomas Blacharz has amazing swivels. The best part is that he does them in a way that works for his body rather than trying to be feminine with them.

Benjamin Wiodham

Let me put it this way, I’m not for stereotypes… if you were going to go with sexist stereotypes, most guys wouldn’t even be on the dancefloor. They’d be at home drinking beer and watching sports. However I am not for this gender neutral crap either. Removing all gendered pronouns from your teaching routine is insane. If you think the fact that swivels looking better on women has anything to do with my sexuality you are just wrong. Women literally have different skeletal structures than men do. Their swivels look better because their hip bones are wider than their shoulders and swivels with a skirt will always look better than swivels with pants. It’s all in the swish. That’s what Jewel was trying to do when she invented them.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

Hm, this comment is so sexist I’m not sure whether to delete it or leave it up as a reminder of what I’m fighting against. I’ll let you decide how you’d like to be remembered.

“Removing all gendered pronouns from your teaching routine is insane.” I think you mean “insanely easy.” If you can lindy hop, changing a few pronouns is a piece of cake.

“Women literally have different skeletal structures…” You’re in luck; I’ve studied anatomy intensely, and this is true. But you’re still wrong. (a) There is a lot of skeletal variation within each sex, and (b) it does not explain your subjective preference for female swivels. I prefer male swivels. Explain that with your limited understanding of anatomy.

“their hip bones are wider than their shoulders…” Not mine. And yet somehow my swivels still look amazing. I wonder why…

Please feel free to email me if you’d like your comment to be deleted, or if you’d like to continue this discussion. Any further comments defending sexism will be deleted.

http://www.calicogoodrich.com Calico

Male swivels. Best thing ever. If eradicating sexism in lindy hop means there will be more male swivels, then for god’s sake, let’s get do that thing.

Benjamin Wiodham

This sexist comment was deleted with pleasure! Please feel free to stay on the topic of solving sexism. And read the comment policy.

Josephine

“Lead does not need to mean ‘in control.’ Follow does not need to mean ‘giving up control.'”

You know, I’m all for give and take in dance connection–totally–but I actually do think those words mean those things to some degree. We wouldn’t have conceptually different words for the two roles if they didn’t. We’d call them A and B, or red and green, or toaster and blender. Words have meaning, and we use those words for a reason. I improvise, I screw around with footwork whenever the music strikes me, I often use styling that some people would consider traditionally masculine, and I follow. I don’t say “woman” or “lady” when I mean “follower,” and I don’t say “man” when I mean “leader.” I enjoy following, and I most certainly see not-effing-up-the-leader-too-badly as one of my goals as a dancer, just as I hope good leaders see an emphasis on steering/floorcraft and not-leaving-me-hanging-at-an-awkward-time as some of their goals. There’s plenty of overlap in the jobs/responsibilities, and partners respond to one another, but there are two roles.

I’d say the idea of the follower necessarily giving up some control is much LESS problematic than your apparent buy-in to the idea that doing so is inferior, or that being in control is superior, so we have to balance them out by doing both, oh my gosh. We’ve been trained to believe that loss of control is feminine, and you continue to devalue it by saying that the best thing we can do to combat that association is to have people who enjoy following behave less like followers, instead of challenging the underlying ideological mediators that tell us loss of control=weak=feminine=bad. You want to fight the gender binary, start there.

The dance does have two roles. Yes, it’s awesome when people can do both. No, I don’t think that should be a requirement. Saying that everyone absolutely should do both actually lends credence to the idea that one role is inferior, and that people who choose that role exclusively are…I dunno–letting down the side. Missing out. Being bad feminists. Being backward. Not “stepping up.” Women–or men–in roles that have traditionally been feminine are not bad feminists, any more than women who stay home with children are bad feminists, or any more than women who are completely dedicated to their high-powered jobs and rock-climbing gyms are automatically good feminists. The problem isn’t the dance roles (or the job, or the kids), it’s the valuation of the roles. I think this entire piece unintentionally highlights some deeply interiorized inferiority complexes about following and stereotypical femininity. The problem isn’t that all people who follow give up some control (because, as I said, I’m all for cooperative dancing and respect for both roles), it’s that you still position that accommodation as feminine by saying that the way past it is to be more like the traditionally “masculine” role.

Do you see how this is, on some level, just more of the same? More of aggressive-is-better, taking-charge-is-best, be-more-like-what-we’ve-always-encouraged-men-to-be-except-now-we’re-not-going-actually-call-those-things-masculine, but oh-yeah-they’re-still-better. More do-both-and-like-it, because what you were doing before isn’t enough, and isn’t valuable. Women’s work.

Being a follower, even a somewhat traditional follower, isn’t a problem to be solved, and it’s certainly not a problem to be solved by trying to be more like a leader even if you don’t want to. The problem is the cultural association of surrendering control with femininity, and femininity with weakness and inferiority, and you’re only reinforcing that by saying “Come on, followers! Everything will get better if you behave more like leaders in your dancing, and if you learn to lead!” I think it’s a much stronger solution to keep removing social barriers so that those who actually WANT to lead (women, men, and everybody who thinks both those words fail them…) can lead and those who want to follow (same…) can follow.

Let’s remove the value judgments from the dance roles instead of invalidating the roles themselves. I’m much more interested in attacking the social conventions than the dance.

You’re of course welcome to change the dance roles completely, but that’s a different conversation, and I think they have value as they are. Please, when you get around to overhauling them, don’t pretend that’s what all feminists want, and go with the “red/green” naming convention or something similar, since you assert that the word “follow” should have very little bearing upon how a person operates within the dance.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

I agree that not everyone “must” be able to dance both roles. But both roles should be taught to listen and respond equally. Why should only one side be expected to listen, while the other side gets to do more talking? No good reason; might as well teach these to both roles.

People can choose to be feminine or masculine, dominant or submissive. We don’t need to build those traits into the roles. Our choice is only free when we aren’t expected to make certain choices, and degraded or ignored for making the “wrong” choice.

Because it’s NOT wrong for a woman to choose to be submissive. It’s not lesser. What’s wrong is expecting follows to be submissive, and then pretending women have the freedom to choose something different. Realistically, we do not have complete freedom of choice to lead. We do not have complete freedom of choice to be non-submissive in the follow role.

Ya get me?

Josephine

“…feminine or masculine, dominant or submissive.”

You just did it again. Those two pairs positioned as analogs is the problem. You can be feminine and dominant. You can be masculine and submissive. You can definitely be feminine and a leader, and masculine and a follower, without destroying the dance roles, but I would say that some aspect of control is and should be build into the leader’s role, and some aspect of response/submission is built into the follower’s. It’s not absolute. We all know there’s overlap and call-and-response and improvisational collaboration. What I am arguing is that the lead and follow roles mean something–something valuable to the experience of the dance–and that as long as we divorce them from gendered stereotypes and expectations, we’d do better not to chuck them. Why even call them lead and follow if there is no appreciable difference in the dance role?

“Realistically, we do not have complete freedom of choice to lead. We do not have complete freedom of choice to be non-submissive in the follow role.”

I’d say that those are two different things: the second is part of the dance (though I don’t think submissive is the ideal word), and the FIRST is the problem. More and better social support for people to choose the dance role that they like is a much better solution than destroying/conflating the dance roles, or saying that followers should just behave more like leaders while in the follower’s role, or that everyone should do both. Learn to lead. Take the leader’s role whenever and if you want it, and of course support other women who make that choice, but don’t call it following, or say that it would be better if we all felt perfectly comfortable doing that kind of dancing when we have taken the follower’s role. If you want to lead, lead, and exert pressure on your community to further socially separate “woman” from “follower” and “man” from “leader.”

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

“You just did it again.” Actually, I didn’t! I purposely ordered them as feminine/masculine and dominant/submissive to confirm your point that you can be feminine and dominant, etc.

But the reaaaal point I’m making is that you can be a follow, and feminine, and dominant (or not submissive). I do not choose submissiveness when I choose to follow; I choose the follow’s movements. I like the rotation and the traveling. I like to swivel on swing outs. I like to turn a lot.

Lead movements and follow movements fit together like puzzle pieces. Adding “dominant” and “submissive” is extraneous; it’s mechanically unnecessary. A person can be dominant or submissive in either role, but a role is not inherently either.

Josephine

Okay, we disagree. I think that part of what makes those “follower’s movements” enjoyable is the taking-direction part of them. Again, submission is an imprecise description, but, for short-hand’s sake, I do think that direction-taking, or momentum-taking, or submission–and excellence in those areas–is one inherent part of the follower’s role. That doesn’t make the role inherently feminine, or better for women, or make it inferior, or mean that if I’m a woman I should only follow. I think we agree about all those things.

However, if I hypothetically want control and also to spin and turn and travel a lot, I can lead and spin and turn and travel a lot. Heck, I can take a ballet class if I don’t care about the partner-dance aspect of it. But, I do care about that part. I like partner dancing. I know you do, too. I, however, see the role and the word “follow” as meaning at least one thing that you don’t–some measure of emphasis on responsive direction-taking. Not to the exclusion of expression or give-and-take, certainly, but an emphasis. I don’t think I’d call the role following if that were not the case. We can just disagree. (Fair warning–I might refer to you as “red,” or as a “toaster,” but it will be in good humor.)

Josh

@Rebecca I’m not sure I see where you’re coming from. I definitely see that there is a spectrum of dominant/submissive within both roles, but as I see it a submissive lead is still characteristically dominant and a dominant follow is still characteristically submissive (this all should be entirely gender-neutral). A submissive lead may lead lighter and leave more room for the follow to style, and likewise a dominant follow may inject additional rhythms or timings into the dance, but ultimately the lead still determines the overall structure of the dance. If you know of any videos where that’s not the case I’d be really interested to see them.

Heather

I getcha. I have been wanting to learn to lead; not because I like it, but because I’d like to teach it, or to lead beginner followers that I introduce to the scene, so that they can be comfortable.

Sadly, in my scene, I’ve been discouraged in subtle ways… Teachers calling me a “man,” teachers asking me to follow when the ratios aren’t perfect, teachers saying, “Okay, leaders, oh, and Heather…” These things really get me down. I actually left the class where the teacher asked me to follow.

But I’m feisty and spicy. Mayhaps I need to chill out? Perhaps I need to smile and nod and show them that I can be a heterosexual woman that learns to lead without getting huffy? What do you think?

Josephine

I’m so sorry that people have been crappy to you for bucking your gender role. This is exactly the kind of stuff that I think is the major problem–not the follower role itself as the responder (or however you want to describe that traditional partnered role), but the social enforcement around women as followers and followers only, and around following as “feminine.” It bums me out, because I myself am interested in learning to lead, too (though I LOVE following), and because I want the follower’s role to be valued on its own, and because I love dancing with other women, and because I know several men who really enjoy following and could probably do without the eyebrow-waggling around that, too.

So, yeah. I hope you find a way to be comfortable learning to lead, and that our communities work at supporting role choices more effectively, and that you enjoy the heck out of it.

Josh

Wow, that’s pretty terrible. In the scene I’m in (OC/LA) I see women leading in classes and workshops all the time. It’s pretty common here for women to lead. I have, however, seen that issue from the other side. As a guy it’s very difficult to learn to follow. A lot of classes discourage guys from following because some guys (especially beginners) might be uncomfortable dancing with another guy. Classes also tend to be follow-heavy anyway. I ended up having to find a friend of mine that wanted to learn to lead and pair up with her apart from the rotation.

Where I’m at, though, experienced dancers are somewhat expected to know both roles if for no other reason than to make it easier to communicate ideas with each other. Sometimes the ideas you want to communicate can’t be put into words or seen, but can easily be felt. With these dancers I’ve never seen someone say “Hold on, let me go find a girl so I can show you.” If it’s a tougher combo or something like that they may bring in a girl follow if there’s one nearby, but that has more to do with her skill as a follow than her gender.

Jamie

> As a guy it’s very difficult to learn to follow.
> A lot of classes discourage guys from following because some guys (especially beginners) might be
> uncomfortable dancing with another guy.

Totally been there. In my local scene people who have been dancing Swing for a year or more are totally cool with guys dancing as follow, with guy or gal leads. But to pick up some follow skills I have to start in the beginner class, right? Because I’m a beginner follow. Where else am I going to learn the basic stepping and skills?

My experience is that roughly 2/5 of beginner guys are surprised when I turn up as follow in the rotation but carry on, 2/5 are a bit anxious about it, and 1/5 are really really uncomfortable.

I’m pretty sure my learning as a follow resulted in a bunch of beginner guys not coming back. So I asked my teacher what I should do, and she basically said “If they can’t deal with it we don’t want them in the scene anyway”.

I’ve noticed that if the teachers mention me by name like “Jamie can you join in as a follow” then more guys are more relaxed about it, but the 1/5 are still anxious.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

SIGH. All these stories of ways that men are discouraged from following and women discouraged from leading are depressing.

However, this is awesome: “I’m pretty sure my learning as a follow resulted in a bunch of beginner guys not coming back. So I asked my teacher what I should do, and she basically said ‘If they can’t deal with it we don’t want them in the scene anyway’.”

Great attitude!

Sarah

I don’t think you need to chill out. It sounds like you are doing something that many other people are welcome to do – take the class as a lead. It shouldn’t matter that you’re a woman.

I would expect dance teachers to take my role as a woman lead in class seriously – not as someone they can ask to switch roles to make things even.

Sally

I actually dance West Coast Swing not Lindy Hop but pretty much all of what you are talking about applies. And I do love reading your article,s Rebecca.

I do both lead and follow but tend to work with just following at present because I had a tendency to get muddled with switching. Both sides are fun and I did find that knowing what the leader does has definitely helped my following. How can you fully know a dance unless you know both sides, and why limit yourself to only one sort of fun?

As far as the initiating is concerned my favourite leader is another woman who has great musicality. I see what she does with the music and can then mimic in the appropriate place or contrast. Similarly she does the same back. As I see it the music is leading and we are both working with it, being aware of what the other does and figuratively saying ‘that’s great, and what about this?’. We are both still learning how to do this so no great ideas about how it can be applied except to say that maybe asking a same sex partner will teach you things about your own dancing. It opens up great possibilities.

Zac W

While language defines us deeply as a species, and we have the power to change how we speak and therefore how we think, I have always felt that too much weight is put on #1 in your list, specifically regarding dance instruction. It’s extraordinarily distracting and off-purpose when I’ve taught or been taught and someone in the class interrupts or shows excessive disgust when gender-neutral pronouns are not used (especially when the teacher is actually trying but slips into norms). I can appreciate the attempt to get involved in a much larger, societal issue, but it’s not the Lindy World’s job to change the world of linguistics, nor even that individual or two in class’ job to convince the entire class (or at least the teacher) to their viewpoint. It’s far, far more important to just dance. That’s what we’re there to do, whether you’re currently focused on learning to lead or learning to follow.

That said, I think it does make sense for teacher’s to set the expectation at the beginning of every class that for simplicity and clarity that the terms “he” and “she” will be used often in place of always using “leader” and “follower,” and that in this day and age, anyone should feel free to lead or follow and not take offense at silly little pronouns. (Although, I like “siya;” make that one happen, Rebecca!)

To me, this entire gender-neutral movement within the dance scene is more concerning in regards to forcing gender neutrality on absolutely everyone and everything. I, being comfortably super-straight, am far more comfortable in dancing with a female. Depending on our communication and history, I will often make it more ‘sexy’ with a female than I would with a male. But I am not interested in nor comfortable with being told that I should make it equally sexy with a male, whether he’s leading or following me, and I would never presume to tell two women that they need to dance sexier together because they should feel comfortable with each other.

Lastly, whatever part you dance, feel free “to back lead” or “hijack” or “initiate,” but please don’t constantly attempt to “anticipate a lead.” For me, that is what ruins the fun when I lead AND when I follow. Mistakes will happen, and they are often hilarious and develop even further communication, but please, please, please… dance behind the beat people. It’s called swing for THAT reason.

BTDubs, I can’t speak very highly for the rest of my following, but MY swivels kick ass.

Sarah

“…but it’s not the Lindy World’s job to change the world of linguistics…”

I think it absolutely is our job to make the Lindy Hop scene inclusive and welcoming and to our damndest little by little to discuss and implement ways to eliminate sexism (which is the topic of this discussion) as well as racism, ablism, and hatred towards different sized bodies.

As a straight cis man, you benefit from the system that’s in place and so you may not experience first-hand what the scene can be like if one does not perform their gender along ‘traditional’ lines. How alienating and unwelcoming that can feel. How because of the rules in place (which you may not be aware of because they mostly benefit you) access to the joy of Lindy Hop is roped off.

If this is ‘forcing gender-neutrality’ it is only that heteronormativity is the current rule and is forced upon everyone who doesn’t fit the mold.

Sarah

Whoops, it was wrong of me to assume you were cis. I apologize.

Zac W

Well said, particularly “you benefit from the system that’s in place” bit. That would be a more interesting focus for “Lindy World changing the world” than breaking down gender roles and being offended by pronouns, at least in my cis male WASP opinion. The reason I used the word “forcing” is because this movement in Lindy, specifically concerning using gender-neutral pronouns, feels extraordinarily forced rather than natural; but the again, I see Rebecca’s original point better now: change the language; change the norm. (I still hate “zhem,” “zhey,” etc; I’m all about “siya” though.)

I am not offended that you assumed I was cis. I’m curious though: now that you know that I am not offended, does that make you feel that your concern was validated or rejected? My point is that we all make assumptions, which in themselves are not evil. Assumptions are just guesses based on reality. What’s evil is, if upon correction when your normative reality is challenged, if you can’t adapt your language and behavior for that specific circumstance. But please continue to challenge my norms because I’m working on adapting my cis male WASP opinion all the time.

In regards to your post and the post below from Alex Z concerning other men being disgusted when he asks them to dance, I have experienced the same. Utter and complete horror at the mere suggestion that I would dance with another man. But it’s not up to him if I want to feel offended or ostracized by that person; it’s my choice to feel ashamed or disgusted, and I certainly never have and never will. That guy is an ass, but I’ll continue to ask men and women to dance, and either can feel free to lead or follow, to feel offended or flattered.

Sarah

Thank you for your response.

It is my goal to identify others as they would identify themselves. So while i am relieved that I did not hurt you by misidentifying you (and the assumptions that can go with misidentifications) I will continue to try and not misidentify people in the future. That is how I would wish to be treated.

I am personally comfortable with movements to combat sexism, racism, ablism, etc with being ‘forced’ because that is the effort and deliberateness that’s required. When the harmful norm is so entrenched and people defend their privilage with such fervency (and sometimes even violence), the response must be measured, clear, deliberate, and even inconvenient and loud sometimes. There is a great deal of momentum to slow up and change direction. Force is required.

I understand that some people may not wish to artificially force a change on their habits and behaviors they may be comforted by and attached to. Solutions like Rebecca’s may feel forced in that way. But because I believe in the goal of the solutions, I am willing to experience some discomfort for them.

Zac W

Again, I love what you have to say here. My norms feel challenged. Thank you.

My questions are: do all cross-dressing, transgender, asexual, questioning, whatever, etc, peoples appreciate being addressed in the “most appropriate” gender term (the answer is no); do many prefer gender neutral terms over gendered terms? (Not all, for certain.); does a gender neutral term fix or hinder the effort? (I believe neither.); Do I prefer a gender neutral term myself? No.

Yes, as you said, the new words themselves are uncomfortable, but it’s not uncomfortable only because I do not like it. It’s uncomfortable because I do not like it as an answer. It’s not addressing the issue which is much deeper. Might it help? Maybe. As an alternative, what I’m proposing is that when someone makes mistakes, such as presuming that I am cisgender, that you as the speaker are aware AND I as the listener am not offended and open a discussion about it.

I will definitely make more mistakes and call more people the wrong pronoun than you. This is a certainty. But I will probably have a lot more interesting conversations because of it (after apology and alteration of my norm, of course) ;)

In the meantime, lead or follow as you wish with whomever says “yes.”

Anonymous

“To me, this entire gender-neutral movement within the dance scene is more concerning in regards to forcing gender neutrality on absolutely everyone and everything. I, being comfortably super-straight, am far more comfortable in dancing with a female. Depending on our communication and history, I will often make it more ‘sexy’ with a female than I would with a male. But I am not interested in nor comfortable with being told that I should make it equally sexy with a male, whether he’s leading or following me, and I would never presume to tell two women that they need to dance sexier together because they should feel comfortable with each other.”

How is advocating men to learn to follow and women to learn to lead “forcing gender neutrality on absolutely everyone and everything?” Your reaction screams homophobic paranoia.

Perhaps as a “comfortably super-straight” man, you’re more comfortable dancing with a female, and you know what? That’s totally fine. Nothing wrong with that.

Your statement that, “Depending on our communication and history, I will often make it more ‘sexy’ with a female,” suggests that you may have some understanding of the paramount importance of consent when it comes to sexual interactions with another person. Therefore I’m perplexed that you somehow read an imperative into Rebecca’s post that she (or anyone) is telling you that you “should make it equally sexy with a male, whether he’s leading or following.”

When did sexiness come into this at all? (‘fess up, you’re a blues dancer, aren’t you? that explains it.) Lindy Hop is not and should not be inherently sexy. If you and your partner consensually choose to introduce some sexiness into it for your mutual pleasure, good on ya. But none of that has anything to do with whether you’re a man, a woman, trans*, or genderqueer, and whether you’re leading, following, “hijacking” (god, I hate that word), or whatever.

Final thought: Saying “leader” or “follower” or, (imagine!) “she or he” or even “they” as a third-person gender-neutral pronoun (it’s a thing. Just ask Facebook.) is NOT THAT DIFFICULT. There’s absolutely no reason to make some kind of announcement at the beginning that you’re always going to refer to leaders as “he” and followers as “she,” especially when that erases and marginalizes men who are following and women who are leading, perhaps *in that very class*.

Zac W

I never argued against advocating learning to lead or follow in my post. I spoke specifically of language/pronouns/teaching/learning/etc. Rebecca’s #2 and #3 point are excellent, and I am not questioning those at all. I lead and follow and have never personally attached gender to either, although I will admit that I do attach gender to some movements, but do not argue that men and women can’t master both. I’m not sure where you’re concluding that I’m homophobic. This is exactly the sort of reverse bigotry that I’m concerned about by enforcing gender neutrality. What I hear you saying is, “You assign masculine and feminine to anything ever? You’re afraid of gays!” Oh… okay….

I am not a blues dancer, but my girlfriend is. I don’t enjoy blues very much, but it does influence what I’ve said above. That said, if you haven’t had a ‘sexy’ lindy dance, you’re missing out. It is entirely different than sexy blues or sexy balboa or sexy tango or sexy in any other dance I’ve found. I’m glad to hear that you feel this gender movement in Lindy has nothing to do with ‘sexiness’ and you’re certainly not alone, but it’s been my experience that many dancer do link the two, very much to both of our displeasure, I think.

You’re absolutely right in your final thought, but I’ve found that it’s, again, off-point of dancing instruction. I don’t feel it necessary for a student nor a teacher to make a big deal if they slip in their usage, nor if they set the expectation of using gendered pronouns at the beginning of class. When I am working on my follow, I expect to hear “she” and that the teacher is referring to me! It’s ridiculous when students storm out because of a pronoun, and it’s distracting when teachers stumble and appear embarrassed when they slip when they are trying to use neutral terms. Get over it and get on with the lesson. Let it go and talk to each other after class in respectful tones. That discussion between teacher and student (and student and other student) is far more important than losing time on ‘awkwardness’ during class.

http://cazort.net Alex Zorach

I find this post really interesting because I think it highlights a lot of things that, at least initially, I was taking for granted and not seeing the sexism in…but when you describe it this way I completely agree that these things have a sexist message or component to them. I’d also like to see the culture in the swing dance community changed.

I’ve actually experienced two explicitly-gendered experiences at dances that made me very uncomfortable. One was a negative reaction when I crossed into the lead role, and another was a comment directed explicitly at men, from the dance organizers, that I did not agree with, did not follow, and did not think was healthy or constructive to say.

The first issue I’ve had is that I’ve found that when I dance the follow part, it’s not always well-received, especially by older men. Thankfully, it’s only a small minority of men, and they’ve always been polite. But there is one older man who regularly dances somewhere near me who actually refuses to dance with me during the lesson. I want to respect people’s boundaries, but at the same time I feel uncomfortable with the fact that this man won’t dance with me but will dance with women in the lead role. I’ve had a few other isolated experiences like this.

Another thing that made me uncomfortable, at the dance scene in Philadelphia, some time back, one of the dance organizers was regularly announcing standards for men to not wear shorts because it doesn’t look good, and, quote: “No one wants to look at your knobby legs”.

It gets very hot and I wear shorts for practical reasons. I don’t own any dresses or skirts, and given the gender normativity at swing dances, I’m not sure I’d feel fully comfortable wearing them (I have worn skirts before to contradances and I felt very comfortable with that). But II was very uncomfortable with the explicitly gendered clothing recommendation. I like my legs, and I think they are pleasing to look at. And if someone doesn’t like looking at them, then frankly, that’s their problem and I think it is rude for them to share that. I wouldn’t tell women not to wear shorts or skirts or anything that shows off their legs, especially when it’s hot, and I don’t appreciate being told not to wear shorts at a dance either, especially when the majority of the people are wearing casual dress.

I wish I had an avenue to like, explore or address issues like this. I don’t really feel comfortable with the way the local dance scene where I live is run. They have periodic “town hall meetings” but it’s usually been one organizer talking most of the time and I’ve always left with a lot of unanswered questions and un-addressed concerns. I’ve also submitted a lot of feedback through the website and a feedback box but seen things like this persist, so I don’t really know much I can do about it…there are other parts of my life where I feel more empowered to make a difference and a part of me would rather just walk away from a situation like this and instead invest my energy in places where I feel like I have more of a voice and more input into decision-making.

Zac W

I’ve found that you can “get away” with shorts if you don’t wear socks… although… that’s kind of gross ;)

Brandi

“I don’t really know much I can do about it…there are other parts of my life where I feel more empowered to make a difference and a part of me would rather just walk away from a situation like this and instead invest my energy in places where I feel like I have more of a voice and more input into decision-making.”

This is a terrible, but common enough thing. When we say something about how it makes us feel unhappy, people are tempted to pull out the “well no one else seems to mind”. Of course no one else minds because you’ve driven away all the people who mind. Yet every one wants to retain beginning dancers.

http://cazort.net Alex Zorach

Oh my gosh, yes, you’ve hit the nail on the head here, I’ve gotten the “well no one else seems to mind” thing when bringing up all sorts of concerns, and in some cases the concerns have been ones where I have a whole group of friends who has stopped coming to the dance because of it, and has expressed it to me!

It really bothers me how people don’t factor in the issue of inclusiveness to the people who aren’t at the dance.

I think it’s natural that any dance will attract a certain type of person. There’s no way to make a dance perfect for everyone because people have different desires and preferences. I just would rather the choices people make that cause this kind of self-selection to be brought out in the open instead of ignored. I think it’s very different to have an open discussion and reach a consensus on: “This is the best way to run things, and we have good reasons for it, and some people won’t like that but we’d all prefer to do it that way.” vs. having things just BE a certain way.

In my local scene I feel like there’s a group that runs things and has pretty open, frank discussions amongst themselves, but then imposes things in a pretty top-down manner on the rest of the dance.

It has been pretty jarring to me because at the same time I’m involved in a consensus-run organization that gives serious consideration to issues even brought up by complete newcomers to the group, because we really want to address all possible concerns, and be the best we can be. We want to be able to explain why we do things how we do, but also listen to and reflect on other people’s ideas. There have been times when I felt the local dance scene was operating this way, but it’s not always, and I’d love it to be at the point where I always felt it was taking this sort of approach.

http://www.calicogoodrich.com Calico

I’m not sure this is the huge problem that some people think it is. A lot of these ideas and metaphors are used when teaching beginners, because as a beginner, it’s hard to grasp the subtleties and nuances of leading and following. A beginning follower can’t tell the difference between an appropriate amount of styling, and a disruptive amount of ignoring the lead. A beginning lead can’t tell the difference between giving a follow room to style and not leading anything at all. As dancers gain more experience, they begin to understand how to listen, how to interact, and how to have a dance conversation. So at the beginning, sure, they are taught these over-simplified ideas. But that “the follower is shopping cart” business pretty stops after lindy 101.
The viewpoints that people seem to be railing against are at the very very end the spectrum, and I don’t think any serious dancer really believes that follows should have no input into the dance, or that leads should only ever be men. I think everyone who has been dancing longer than 6 months agrees that these are ridiculous statements.
The leader and follower, whether men or women, have a particular role in the dance. They are not the same, but that doesn’t make it sexist. You can be a feminine lead, or a masculine follow, or whatever your little heart desires. There’s a lot of leeway there as far as styling, but at the end of the day, the lead leads and the follow follows. That’s what those two roles mean. Sure, there’s overlap, and interaction, but this is the basic setup of lindy hop, which I think is something we can all get on board with.
It seems like everyone agrees and we are all saying the same thing, just to different degrees.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

Yeah, in Seattle it’s not as big of a problem. We’re lucky here.

“the lead leads and the follow follows.” Do you mean the lead initiates and the follow responds? And if so, have you ever thought about why it’s set up that way? As I mentioned above, it’s not a mechanically necessary distinction. The dance can look 100% identical no matter who is initiated the moves. So where did we get the idea that leads must be the primary initiators? (And that men are supposed to be the leads?)

Just some things to think about. Anyhow, I’d like to keep this conversation on track, i.e. discussing solutions. You can email me if you want to continue discussing whether gendered dance roles are a problem.

Devonavar

I tend to dance more in the blues and fusion scenes, and I think those scenes may be further along in degendering themselves than Lindy-Hop. But, the concepts are the same, and I think they transfer over quite well. I’m a natural lead, but I follow and switch frequently enough, so I’m well aware of the gender dynamics at work.

After reading and re-reading your article, as well as all the comments, I’m no longer very sure what you thing either the problem or the solution is, but I think you might be confusing sex and sexism. I agree 100% that a good dance is a conversation that involves both partners. I’m completely lost by what you mean by what it means to be a follow, *and* feminine, *and* dominent. I’m not sure why so much of the conversation has centred around dominence and control; in my mind, those things aren’t particularly relevant to the lead and follow roles. If they were, then maybe I could understand your desire to eliminate dance roles better.

But anyhow, sexism: As far as I can tell, the sexism you are complaining about is that men are expected to lead and women are expected to follow. I’ll admit, this is a problem when I’m trying to dance as a male follow, but I have trouble seeing how it is sexist. It’s not an unreasonable expectation — most men are leads and most women are follows. So, based purely on the reality of the situation, it’s not surprising that we expect this; it’s the reality of the situation. To expect otherwise would be to deny reality.

My impression is that you don’t like this reality; you would prefer a world where there were fewer expectations, with more male follows and female leads and a broader spectrum in between. That’s fine, but it’s not sexist. It’s not sexist to have gender roles. It’s not sexist that most men prefer to lead and most women prefer to follow. It is gendered, and it involves sex, but it’s not discriminatory in a problematic way; nobody is being oppressed here. Personal preferences are personal preferences, and I’ve heard you say several times that you want to defend people’s preferences, whatever they are.

That means you have to face the reality that, most of the time, men will prefer to lead, and women will prefer to follow. It’s not all of the time. Based on the connections I get from beginner dancers, about 20% would be more suited to leading. I assume it’s the same vice versa, but I have much less experience dancing with beginner leads.

You have to ask, why are those preferences there? I mentioned earlier that I’m a natural lead. That’s a reflection of my personality, not my gender (though perhaps it’s not so easy to separate the two). But, even more than that, it’s the role I naturally take when I dance to music. It’s not that it’s my preference to lead so much as it is my tendency to do so. This has been the case as long as I can remember, and it was especially pronounced when I was a beginner. Even more than that, playing the lead role brought something deep out of me; it made me feel like a man. I can’t speak for women, but I believe that many women experience the same thing when they follow. So, on an even deeper level than perference, I think the expectations about gender and dance roles come from what men and women are often best suited to. This isn’t always the case — as I say, I’d guess about 20% of people are better suited to the “other” role.

Bearing that in mind, is it a surprise that we have an expectation that men lead and women follow? I think there is a clear sexual difference in which gender chooses to lead and follow when they learn to dance, and I don’t think can be written off as a social construction. Or, at the very least, it’s a social construction that runs much, much deeper than social dance. It’s only high level dancers that can comfortably choose their dance role; everyone else is stuck with the role they are more suited to. Yes, this makes it difficult for the 20% who are better suited to dancing cross-gender, but that difficulty is rooted in a difficult reality, not in sexism. If we want to put our energy anywhere, let’s put it into letting beginners know it’s ok to dance off-gender, not trying to redefine the dance itself.

As for living in a world where advanced dancers can dance the role they desire at any given moment? I believe we already live in this world. There’s no shortage of advanced dancers who dance off-roles when they feel like it. Yes, they are restricted to dancing with other advanced dancers, but that’s because it’s *hard* for beginner dancers to dance in roles they aren’t familiar with. As an advanced dancer, the onus is on you to conform to the limitations of your partner, not the other way around.

I can walk onto any dance floor right now and choose to lead or follow without saying anything more than “Would you like to dance”. The only limitation is that I can’t lead people who don’t follow, and I can’t follow people who don’t lead. The role I actually take is based a little bit on the role that I decide to take, but it’s based a lot more on the connection I feel in the other person, and it is determined in the first few seconds of connection. If I want to lead, I’ll express that desire by offering high tone and (likely) a lead connection. If I want to follow, I’ll offer lower tone than I feel in my partner, and a follow connection. If I want to switch, I’ll change the tone that I offer and see if my partner responds. The role I adopt fot the dance will be determined by the desire I express and the connection I receive, and it will be settled early on in the dance, without needing to communicate verbally; the language of dance is sufficient. Occasionally, it takes a little longer if we both want the same role, but that’s just the equivalent of sorting out a disagreement. Eventually, we’ll decide on roles and enjoy our dance.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

There are 2 sexist problems: (a) That men and women are expected to lead and follow respectively. And (b) that the roles are then made to be dominant and submissive, respectively.

This dominant-submissive polarization of the roles is not drawn from thin air, and is not mechanically necessary. It comes from traditional gender roles, and we continue to enforce them by separating people into dance roles by gender. This happens either by subtle implications, or by overtly discouraging people from doing the non-traditional role.

So, I’m expected to be the follow. Then I’m also expected to be submissive. This is sexism, and I really hate the way people justify it with “because tradition” or “that’s how it works” or “because biology.” Or as men like to say, “Women can lead! …They just don’t want to.”

You said, “I think there is a clear sexual difference in which gender chooses to lead and follow when they learn to dance.”

Anyhow, I asked that this thread stay focused on solutions to the problems posed. Please email me if you’d like to further debate whether gendered dance roles are gendered. I’m looking forward to reading that research. Cheers!

Devonavar

Boy did that come out wrong. I wish I had edited a bit before I posted, because I think my point would have been clearer; I was posting from an airport lounge, and my flight was boarding, so maybe I posted too quickly. Having re-read things, I think I was trying to say too much, and my point got lost.

Anyway, here’s what I thought I was saying:

“I dance Fusion, and my experience is that it is a community that is already doing a dance that is successfully breaking down gender roles. It is doing such a good job that I experience very little sexism when I dance. You should check it out, I think your Lindy world could learn from that.”

On that note, I STRONGLY recommend checking out Justin Riley’s Gender Bender Blues Recess, which is an annual event that is specifically designed to tackle these issues.

In no way did I mean to suggest that there isn’t sexism in your community; I’m not in it, so how could I know? I really did think I was pointing at a solution (i.e. look at how the Fusion community is tackling these issues — we are having some success), so I’m sad that I came across as denying the problem.

With respect to the dom-sub dynamic, I believe you when you say it’s a problem in your community; it is less so in mine. And, despite that, we have achieved success without eliminating the concepts of lead or follow. I don’t think we have any particular terminology that bypasses it, but here’s how I think of it:

Leading is fundamentally about listenening. It is impossible to truly lead if you don’t know what your follow is doing or where he or she is. Nobody follows a lead who forges ahead without regard for the safety, well-being, and desires of his or her followers. If you teach leading as being about listening and acting based on what you hear, I think you will get around the dominant problem.

Following is fundamentally about being receptive (or, alternately, simply relaxing). Another word is responsive. That means it is about being open to the suggestions made by the lead. Usually, it also means saying yes to those suggestions, and then adding to it. I do not see that as a submissive thing; submissive would be doing what the lead says no matter what. It is possible to be receptive and say no to things you don’t like or are dangerous. An analogy is theatre sports: In theatre sports, good improvisation comes from saying “yes, and…” That is, you don’t block the suggestions that are made; you take them and add to them.

———–

Now, let’s talk about heteronormativity. When I said I saw sexual differences, I did not mean biological differences. I meant differences rooted in sex. The act, not the identity. I don’t need a study to tell me that heterosexuality is a thing. I don’t really care where that norm comes from. It can be biological, or cultural or traditional or whatever, it doesn’t matter. What matters is that a majority of men and women approach sex in a gendered way. That majority is what we call heterosexual, and, because they are heterosexual, dancing with the opposite gender often has significance beyond the dance floor.

It also means that their motivations for dance involve acting out a gender role, and they gravitate towards their chosen role because it fulfills a sexual need. Asking those people to step out of that role is asking a lot of them. It is asking them to go directly against one of their motivations for dancing. The need to break down gender expectations (i.e. the assumption that all women are follows) needs to be tempered with the understanding that gender expectations do serve a purpose for a significant number of dancers.

One solution to this would simply be to separate the hetero and queer worlds. We could just have gendered “straight” dances, and ungendered “queer” dancers, but I think we are both more ambitious than that. We want a dance that welcomes both worlds, and, ideally, helps them learn from each other. In my mind, that means eliminating assumptions and expectations about gender in dancing — I do think it’s important to separate gender from dance role from sexual role. But it also means leaving space at both ends of the spectrum. Those who prefer to dance in a traditional gender role should be free to do so without being expected to dance off-role just because that is what their partner is asking of them. Likewise, those who prefer to dance off-role or switch should not be forced into traditional roles just because the wrong person asked them to dance.

And that means we have to face the reality of a dance floor in which not everyone is well suited to dancing with each other; we need to get stronger about knowing when and how to politely decline a dance that isn’t right for us.

I believe that everyone should learn both dance roles. Tango does this to some extent, and they are stronger for it. But, having learned it, I don’t believe everyone should be forced to dance both roles. Some people prefer one or the other, and it’s not our business to tell them otherwise.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

Hey thanks for your reply; it definitely clarified some things. Much appreciated.

Now I need to clarify, because this is something a lot of people misunderstand. You said, “Asking those people to step out of that role is asking a lot of them.”

I’m not asking people to express their gender differently on the dance floor. I’m asking the community not to pressure people into gender roles. Some people give the “if you don’t like it, get out” excuse. That is not acceptable. Human beings are far more gender-diverse than people think.

I also really don’t want to get into the “dancing is for sex” motivation you ascribe to a large number of people. The most committed lindy hoppers don’t dance for sex. We sometimes have sex with dance partner(s), sure. But most of us would still dance without any sexual motivations. It’s like, so low on most lindy hoppers’ priority lists when dancing.

Anyhow, for the people who ARE motivated by sex, no problem! No one is preventing sex. No one is preventing heterosexuality. Yay! I’m straight, and I met my husband dancing. So I appreciate that.

THIS, however, I totally agree with: “Those who prefer to dance in a traditional gender role should be free to do so without being expected to dance off-role just because that is what their partner is asking of them. Likewise, those who prefer to dance off-role or switch should not be forced into traditional roles just because the wrong person asked them to dance.”

YES! That is exactly my point.

“And that means we have to face the reality of a dance floor in which not everyone is well suited to dancing with each other; we need to get stronger about knowing when and how to politely decline a dance that isn’t right for us.”

We already have to face the reality that not everyone is well-suited to dance with each other. The more we can discuss it, the better we can deal with it, right?

Thanks again.

http://www.dancekepler.com Max Kepler

Dear Devonavar,

Just because you haven’t personally experienced oppression in the dance world doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist. It might mean that it is simply invisible to you. A blind-spot, so to speak, from your vantage point.

You seem like a nice person and I am sure that you would never intentionally perpetuate sexism. Therefore, I hope you will forgive me for pointing out what seems pretty obvious to me.

The statement, “Most men are leads and most women are follows,” is sexist. I’m sure unintentionally so, but when you say things like “most men prefer to lead” or “most women prefer to follow” your statements don’t take into account the fact that most partner dance classes in Seattle are taught in an inherently (though, again, probably unintentionally) sexist way, by implicitly or explicitly assigning women to the follower’s role and men to the leader’s role. Assignment occurs explicitly in cases where the teacher says, “Women please go over there and men come over here,” (or vice versa) you may be surprised how often this still happens even here in Seattle regardless of teacher gender. Assignment also happens implicitly when teachers say, “Leaders over here, followers over there,” and students who have been in previous dance classes immediately begin to segregate themselves according to gender, out of habit and the rest, or most of the rest, do the same to avoid social awkwardness. Sometimes even well-meaning dance instructors perpetuate gender stereotypes by introducing dance roles by saying something like, “the lead role is the one usually/traditionally danced by the man, the follow role is the one traditionally danced by the woman.” I’ve been guilty of this in the past, myself. I don’t do this any longer, as this little speech is outdated, unnecessary, perpetuates useless gender stereotypes, and makes a lot of people (including myself) feel uncomfortable, especially if they or someone they care about is taking the class in a role that I would have previously described as non-traditional for their gender.

I know what I’m talking about here. I’ve been teaching GLBT-friendly (and sometimes GLBT-majority) partner dance classes for years and used to be surprised (over and over again! I’m a slow learner, sometimes) when some of the lesbian-identified women would back-out of learning to lead when there were more (gay-identified) men in the room than women, despite previously saying that their goal in learning to dance was to be able to dance with other lesbian women. What was the reason for this? I couldn’t figure it out. These women were all-ages, many of them working in a career that required an advanced degree, some of them self-employed… really they ran the gamut. Eventually it occurred to me to change the language I was using in my classes. Yes, indeedy. That made a huge difference and suddenly I had women in their 20’s, 30’s, 40’s, 50’s, 60’s, and – yes – one in her 70’s learning and becoming extremely competent leaders in both lindy hop and Argentine tango classes.

Fairly recently I overhauled my entire teaching methodology so that ALL of my group classes are now taught open-role and EVERY student (regardless of sex, gender-identity, or sexual preference) learns both how to lead and how to follow (and, hopefully, Rebecca, how to respond and how to initiate). It’s been awesome. I get very heterogeneous groups of students in my beginners’ classes who learn partner connection at a deep level from early on in their dancing and who can than choose to dance with ANYONE THEY WANT, regardless of their others skills (or lack thereof) or gender (or lack thereof ;). In my advanced classes I get to teach all kinds of fun and playful things, like smooth and surprising fun ways to switch roles mid-dance, passing the lead, steals, etc. It’s awesome.

I want to end by saying that I think it’s really cool that you know how to follow and how to lead and that you have some of the subtle connection skills (such as the tone management and attention to tone-matching that you mention above) that allow role-switching with a particular partner. Glad you’re having fun out there! Consider, please, that you have experienced privilege because of your sex and that you may not be privy to the experiences of women who choose (or would like to choose) to either lead in partner dance or (in Rebecca’s terminology, which is different from mine) initiate moves from the follower’s position.

Devonavar

Dear Max,

I want you to know I am capable of writing a response that is just as condescending as the one you wrote me. However, I will do my best not to do so. I’ll go point by point.

– The statement, “Most men are leads and most women are follows,” is a simple fact of reality. If I go to a swing dance, a majority of the men will call themselves leads and a majority of women will call themselves follows. The reasons why they identify with one role or the other do not change the underlying fact. It is not sexist to acknowledge a reality that exists, whether or not that reality happens to be sexist. You clearly think reality is a bit sexist. I agree. But I don’t think it helps to point at any given example of gender and scream “Sexism!”.

– You run GLBT-friendly classes. Are they also hetero-friendly? When you say they can choose to dance with ANYONE THEY WANT, are you okay if they would really just prefer to dance with the opposite sex and not switch roles at all? Do you have room for that preference? Do you force your students to dance off-role when that makes them uncomfortable? I strongly believe that everyone should learn both roles; I don’t believe everyone should be forced to.

– You should be careful throwing around words like privilege. Someone might think you are attacking them. Yes, I am privileged because of my gender. I am also privileged because of my race, because of my education, and because of my socio-economic status. And, as someone who has a whole lot of privilege, I can either take advantage of it and use my power to oppress the less fortunate for my own personal gain, or I can recognize my privliege and use my power to create a more equitable world. Whatever happens, I still have power, and I didn’t choose that anymore than someone less privileged chose their position in the world. I’m not going to apologize for being born. I’m also not going to feel inclined to help people who identify me as an enemy by pointing at me and shouting “privilege”.

As it happens, I just got back from Blues Recess Massive, where I was privy to quite a few women sharing their experiences about leading. There was quite a large number of women doing so, and an equal number of men following. I’m guessing, but I’d say a good third of the room had someone dancing off role at any given time. We all coexisted quite happily. I danced in my dominent role most of the time, but I also both asked and was asked by other men, and I led and followed both genders. And, it was quite normal for all of those interactions to happen.

And, because I was also interviewing people while I was there, I actively sought out the experiences that people had. And they told me time and again that one of the major reasons they like coming to the event is because of the safe space that is created for people to dance in whatever gender/role configuration suits them.

I’m aware that not all events and not all dance scenes are like this. The Recess events are special. If you’d been listening, you’d have noticed I was saying that a safe space for nongendered dancing already exists, not that sexism isn’t out there.

http://www.dancekepler.com Max Kepler

Dear Devonavar,

I’m not sure why you would imply that I have not been listening. I never claimed that you said that sexism doesn’t exist.

Has somebody asked you to apologize for being born? That would be odd as well as really mean.

I, for one, have never thought of you as an enemy. Why would I?

It sounds like you may be feeling a little guilty about your privileged status. Have people told you in the past that you are a bad person because of the ways you’ve used the privileges you were born into? If so, I don’t agree with their sentiment.

It sounds like you have given your use of power some thought, and that’s a good thing.

In addition to the options you mention (“use power to oppress for personal gain” or “use power to create a more equitable world”) there are other options. For example, you could renounce your power. Scary, right? But an interesting idea to play around with.

When you say, “You should be careful throwing around words like privilege. Someone might think you are attacking them,” I feel sad because it seems like you are suggesting that I restrict my use of the word “privilege” out of fear that someone might feel threatened. I would prefer to use that term in a manner that is precise and accurate, without fear. Would you be willing to use your power to help me to do that?

* To address the questions in your second point, the short answers are,

“Yes, my Open Role classes are hetero-friendly.” I have a number of male and female students who identify as straight and who keep returning to my classes because my awesome teaching partners (some of whom are straight) and I create a classroom environment which is fun and welcoming and allows for great breadth and depth of learning. Also,

“Yes, I recognize that people have preferences about with whom they wish to dance and sometimes their preferences are limited to dancing a single role with people of the opposite sex.” This is not my preference for my own dancing, but others’ varying preferences are no skin off my back. Why would I want to restrict other people’s dance choices when my hope is that my own dance preferences be respected and honored? And certainly,

“No, I don’t force anyone to do anything.” That would not only be unethical, but also impossible, and ridiculous for me to try (if you knew me, you’d know why). Sometimes I invite my students to gently push their own comfort zones – I think that’s one aspect of learning. But the decision always lies with the student. If at any point I discover that my class is not working for one of the participants for any reason, I seek to speak with that student to find out what might work better for them, and offer appropriate alternatives.

The longer answers are:

Ensuring that my LGBT-friendly classes were also friendly to the privileged heterosexual community was not my original intention in the creation of one of my businesses, Queer Seattle Tango (http://queerseattletango.com/). My original intention was to create a safe space for gay- and lesbian-identified individuals, anyone who preferred to dance with same-sex partners, and anyone who wanted to learn to dance tango outside of traditional gender roles to do just that in an environment where their choices would be accepted by default, rather than questioned by default. This did not exist yet in Seattle in 2010. It took about two years, but having created tango opportunities in Seattle, where none previously existed, I’ve moved on.

I’m now teaching Open Role classes that are literally open to anyone who is interested in participating in a learning environment where EVERYONE gets to practice partner dance in both the follow and lead roles in every class. Hooray! As far as I know, this type of class structure didn’t previously exist in the lindy hop or tango worlds in Seattle, but is now being replicated on the East Side by some other teachers.

I don’t want to take credit for the idea, though. My decision was informed in large part by the teaching methodology of an instructor who I knew in Eugene, Oregon, named Elizabeth Wartluft (now living and teaching in Portland). Elizabeth taught both roles of tango to everyone in all of her classes, starting from Day 1. Many of her tango students have gone on to become world-class instructors, for example Rebecca Rorick Smith (now Boston-based, teaching out of MIT, and traveling nationally to give workshops), and Dominic Bridge (who has established a tango school in Florence and continues to teach internationally), among many others. I also give Elizabeth credit for influencing the growth of the tango scene in the Eugene/Springfield area (population of about 100,000) to over 1000 tango dancers, including over 200 regulars.

I am very clear in my intention about how and why I offer my current classes, and recognize that my classes may not be a good fit for everyone, depending on their learning goals, their comfort-level with theirs and others’ bodies, and their security within their own sexuality. I am absolutely okay with that. I don’t offer the same format as other local instructors, so I try to be very clear in my promotional materials, including information on my website about what to expect. Nonetheless, once in a while, someone comes to class not understanding what they’ve signed up for. In these rare cases, the student and I have a frank discussion which includes my offering a refund or other recompense as well as recommendations to other instructors, should they decide to drop the class. I am grateful that some of these questioning students have chosen to reflect upon their own feelings and stick with my classes of their own volition, as they recognized the value in what my classes offer them. Others have dropped and accepted a refund or a private lesson trade. Some of these same students have then later come back to my classes when they felt more ready to do so. In all of these cases (student chooses to stay, drop, or return) I feel very honored to be a part of their learning process!

* I am glad that you recognize reality as at least a bit sexist.

Have you ever seen a well-qualified, highly-skilled, extremely knowledgable and creative female marginalized in an academic position? I have, many times. It was tragic in each case – a loss not just to these women but to their scientific communities, not to mention society as a whole.

Have you ever gone to a job interview for a technical position and had the interviewer assume you were there to interview for the office manager opening? Shocking, especially given that this occurred in Seattle in 2013. But that’s reality.

Ever seen a male dancer ask a female dancer who was learning to lead, “Why do you want to learn to lead?” That used to happen all the time, and it still happens today. It gets old *really* fast.

Can you imagine a man (or a woman) walking up to you and asking, “Oh, why do you want to learn to lead?” I bet you can. I bet you would be pretty surprised by the question.

I bet you’ve occasionally been asked why you want to follow. I bet your feelings in those cases were less surprised and more sad, disappointed, perhaps angry. You might even have experienced some self-doubt about your choice. Are you fully-qualified to perform the follower’s role? Will you be able to do it competently? Is your sexuality in question? Why does this person even care?

When I said, “The statement, ‘Most men are leads and most women are follows,’ is sexist,” I meant,
“The statement, ‘Most men are leads and most women are follows,’ when phrased in that exact wording, perpetuates an unnecessary and socially-harmful gender stereotype by removing a description of the current state of reality from the sexist cultural context in which it originated.”

An additional reason that I try to avoid labeling people in the form “(most) ____ are ____” is that doing so turns out to have a large subconscious psychological impact. This phenomenon is hard for me to explain in short format, but if you are interested, you can find details in a talk, “Being by Doing: Invoking the Self to Influence Behavior” by academic psychologist Christopher Bryan. It’s available for free on iTunes U.

Habits of behavior, including habits of language, help to maintain the status quo in which men and women are not afforded equal opportunities to contribute their ideas, express their opinions, or share their understanding of the world.

I am proposing that we (dancers, and especially partner dance instructors) change that reality, at least in a small way, by choosing our language mindfully in the context of partner dance classes. I am also proposing that partner dance classes, especially for beginners, be restructured to allow new, non-sexist norms to form in our existing partner dance scenes. A non-sexist partner dance reality is one I’ve been thirsting for for a long time and one towards which I’ve already given thousands of hours of my time. I hope you will join me in working towards that goal.

P.S. I’m glad you had a good time at Blues Recess Massive. It sounds like a fun event and I am glad that events like this exist for people who are able to spend several days camping and dancing. I haven’t ever been to the Massive and am curious what the median age was of the attendees at this year’s BRM.

I am sorry that you found my previous response to be off-putting. I can certainly see how you might interpret it to be condescending, especially since you don’t know me. In fact, I was trying to be extra-polite, as I don’t know you. (Or, if I do know you in person, I’m not aware of that, as your handle on the DWT blog does not link back to any contact info or personal data.)

Especially since we don’t know each other, not only do I prefer to speak politely to you, but I also prefer to assume that you have good intentions and to hope that you are open to feedback on your language. Perhaps you will be open, or perhaps you will request to end this conversation without coming to a mutual understanding. Perhaps you are not open to feedback from someone you don’t know. Perhaps you felt defensive when I criticized your choice of wording. That is understandable, although unfortunate for me as it impedes our communication with each other. C’est la vie.

Matt G.

I agree with a lot of what’s been said, and particularly Calico’s comment. I’m just writing to add that I’ve never found the “conversation” analogy very helpful. For me, the lead/follow relationship is more like an interview. The best ones really are conversations, but if things start to lag or the participants are simultaneously pulling in different directions there’s a mechanism to avoid awkwardness that’s built into the format: the interviewee is subordinate. This is lindy hop’s last line of defense against deteriorating into an Alphonse and Gaston routine. Of course, in cases where the leader and follower are extremely skilled and attentive to one another, they almost never fall back on this crutch. The genius to do this has nothing to do with ideas about gender roles or even submissive or dominant personality types. It’s purely an emanation of dance-specific social IQ and the wisdom of experience to be receptive in those moments when connection and momentum make it natural for your partner to initiate. If you’re the kind of dancer who never really listens, but just looks for opportunities to talk, then whether you’re a leader or a follower you will never be as good as you could be.

http://tangolio.com/ David Phillips

I wonder if the model of CRM (Crew Resource Management) in aviation might inform the discussion? The PIC (Pilot In Command) has ultimate responsibility for the operation and safety of the flight. In a commercial aircraft with multiple pilots, the PIC is the captain, who typically sits in the left seat, while the first officer is the copilot sitting in the right seat.

At any time during a flight either pilot can be the PF (pilot flying) or PM (pilot monitoring). The PF during that time is responsible for the in-flight operation of the aircraft, either hand flying or using autopilot. Both pilots share various duties that are (we hope) well coordinated and communicated.

In a scenario like this, I might be tempted to consider the dancer who proffered a dance as the captain for the duration of that dance, with primary (but not sole!) responsibility for the safe operation of that dance. Then at any time either dancer can be the DF – dancer flying or the DM – dancer monitoring. (And, yes, we understand that the flyer must also monitor, just as the leader indicates a move, then follows the follower’s actual performance.) The hand-off between DF and DM can be formal, “Do you want to fly or monitor?” :) or a simple nod of the head or even by merely responding to a lead indication by their partner.

In this way we get away from the notion of a leader directing the actions of a follower. (Even as we acknowledge that, yes, some leaders do give “indications” tantamount to orders, and that, perhaps, in some situations with some followers, that’s what it takes.) Instead, the DF is directing the dance at hand, while operating the controls in expectation of producing a desired response, and then responding to the actual response.

The DM monitors what they are feeling in their body closest to their spine (most important, in my estimation), visual and other leads from the DF, leads from the music, the floor situation, and so on.

This, then, produces an effect that is so much fun it feels like, um, flying over the dance floor.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

Yo dawg, I pilot my own body. You can make suggestions, but I make the decisions. Just something to remember when you start to feel like you’re in control. :-)

I like the conversation model better. This analogy keeps things simple, so we don’t have to add inanimate objects into the foray.

http://tangolio.com/ David Phillips

Heaven forfend, I’m not suggesting adding an inanimate object to the mix, nor even suggesting specific new terminology. I see flying as a metaphor for dancing, and vice-versa. But that’s probably just me.

I *am*, however, casting about for new gender neutral, *control* model-free terminology that is easy to understand and easy to both speak and write. It was suggested (at Ambidancers on Facebook, where Mary Christensen censored me for saying what I’m about to say) that eliminating “he” “she” from teaching and writing about dance was the minimum that one should expect from someone serious about eliminating sexism and role limitations from dance. I demurred. I do encourage people, animals, and inanimate objects of either sex, or no sex, to learn both lead and follow roles. Be all that you can be!

On the other hand, though I’ve seriously tried, I find it difficult to eliminate he/she from teaching and discussions. It’s just such a handy shorthand. I’ve tried, and will continue using “lead” and “follow” as a substitute for he/she, but I – and I think my listeners – find it tedious and awkward. Imagine language without pronouns.

In ASL (American Sign Language) we use pointing and eye gaze to virtual placeholders as pronouns.) Shorthands aren’t just a convenience in expression, they are also a help in cognition. (Provided that one doesn’t have to use extra mental processing to understand a reference.) Say, that gives me an idea! In ASL we name specific things and place them in the virtual space for easy later reference. In discussion I could introduce our cast of characters as Sam and Jan (sex ambiguous names), where Samantha is the one who has the suggestion role at any particular time, and Jan has the joiner role. Jan can either join Sam in the proposed action, or propose his *own* response.

Short, easy to write and say, gives listeners the chance to create their own mental personas for Sam and Jan. I think I might play with this.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

Well, perhaps I misunderstood your analogy! BTW, I’d like to note that I had to look up the word “forfend.” :-) I like your ASL-inspired idea. I’d love to know what you come up with.

http://www.dancekepler.com Max Kepler

Interesting ideas, David Phillips. I was intrigued (and only slightly confounded) by your aviation model, and am amused by your Sam/Jan suggestion, especially since there is a skillfully-ambidancetrous tanguero local to Seattle named Jan.

I’d like to add that I’ve listened to a lot of feedback over the years from my dance students and one recurring theme is that many of the women don’t like to be referred to as “he,” regardless of what role they are dancing. Equally, many of the men dislike being referred to as “she,” regardless of role. I, personally, couldn’t give a flying fig whether someone refers to me as “he” or “she,” on or off the dance floor. But I respect that some people have strong preferences for a particular gender with which they prefer to be identified.

On a slightly-related note, and since we are discussing solutions on this blog, I’d like to link here, to a very useful resource, the Androgyny RAQ. RAQ stands for Rarely Asked Questions, in this case questions that perhaps *should* be asked, but often aren’t.

which answers important questions related to:
* what pronouns to use and when
* what to do if you can’t determine someone’s sex
and, perhaps most importantly**
* “What is the job description of a Gender Oracle?”

** sarcasm***
*** But really these web pages have been a great resource for me in learning how to address people from all points along (and/or off of) the gender continuum, and I hope they will be helpful to you, too.

http://www.calicogoodrich.com Calico

Oh my gosh, you guys. Lindy hop has leading and following. That is one of the dynamics that defines the dance. If you want a dance with no leading and following, go to fusion, or contact improv.

Sarah

Rebecca’s proposed solution isn’t to eliminate leading and following but to adjust the way we discuss them, teach them, and think about them in terms of control, power, and gender roles.

The suggestion (which I agree with) is to maintain the distinct roles, but to makes sure that both are treated equally, and to expand the definition so that both dancers can expect to feel an equal sense of control and creative input.

Concrete points might be…
– Teaching and encouraging leads to listen more to follows creative input and to engage and incorporate their suggestions into the dance.
– Teaching and encouraging follows to initiate movements for both partners to participate in.

Making these changes (in conjunction with Rebecca’s other suggestions) would serve to eliminate the sexist gender-based expectations built into the role of lead and follow, which would make our community more welcoming and accessible to more types of people, regardless of how they express their gender.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

BOOM. And then individuals can decide whether they wish to be in control, or let their partner be in control, or something in between, or just be flexible. I totally agree that lindy hop will be more accessible. It can also still look exactly identical to the lindy hop we do today.

There’s no one right way to do it. I’d like to see teachers spend equal time working with leads and follows on both responding and initiating. Random example: If you spend 20 minutes teaching leads how to initiate some moves, spend 20 minutes teaching follows how to initiate simple variations. Lots of options.

http://tybe.blogspot.com Leee

The one thing that’s stuck with me in my aborted attempts at learning tango is that the leaders aren’t making follows do anything; instead, they’re suggesting options for the follows to take or not as they see fit. Sorry if someone already mentioned this!

http://twitter.com/ArntRJohansen Arnt Richard Johansen

So I’ve been reading your post a couple of times, and the comment thread, not quite sure if I’ve understood what your program is. I think this is the clearest statement so far:

This is a very intriguing thought. I wonder if it’s possible to teach it in a class, and if so, how. I’m picturing something like teaching a swing-out from the ground up, while letting the person on the right (formerly known as “the follower”) initiate every movement, and letting the person on the left (formerly known as “the leader”) respond. And if they can do that, maybe let them switch “roles“ in the second half of the class while still doing the same movements.

Or maybe something else entirely. You’re the teacher; I’m just a dancer and occasional student. :-)

If it can be done, I think such a class would be mind-expanding, regardless of whether it fixes the problem you are trying to solve.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

Your class idea is exactly my thought. I like to start with simpler movements when working on connection, for example a 6-count basic. You have one person initiate a few times. Then you stop and have the other person practice initiating. Everything builds from there up. That’s not the only way to teach both roles both skills, though. I’d love to hear other ideas.

Erin

Commented deleted by moderator. Off topic and did not meet comment policy.

Josh

Well, that deletion was unfortunate.

Erin

Of course it was deleted. Some people can’t handle it when you just lay it out for them.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

Lol. And some people apparently can’t handle following the comment policy. Your comment was off-topic, inflammatory, insulting, and poorly thought out. If that’s “laying it out,” then you can do so on your own blog.

http://www.kateolivieri.com Kate O

REBECCA. I want to give you a standing ovation. I loved the first post in the series that you wrote – thank you for being brave and articulate enough to say things many of us have thought for a long time. I’m hoping that this is going to trigger a world wide revolution. Every swing dancer needs to read this!

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

Thank you so much!! I hope you have a space/circle of friends where you feel comfortable talking about this. This is what happens when we start a dance world takeover!

http://www.dancekepler.com Max Kepler

Okay, since this thread is intended to be for solutions to the sexism-in-partner-dance problem, I’d like to put out there a solution that I’ve been offering in ALL of my dance class. When I say, “solution,” I’m certainly not referring to a final product, but more a work-in-progress. I am very interested in feedback on this work, especially from those who have taken my classes.

All of my group classes are now taught open-role and every student (regardless of sex, gender-identity, or sexual preference) learns both how to lead and how to follow. I do this in my lindy hop classes. I do this in my tango classes. Thus far my experience with this has been awesome all-around.

My beginners’ classes attract an extremely diverse bunch of students who get to learn partner connection at a deep level from early on in their dancing and who have the added bonus of then being able to choose to dance with anyone, regardless of the other’s gender or skill set. These classes progress through material slightly more slowly than uni-role classes, but slightly-less material for greatly-deeper learning and increased retention is a totally worthwhile trade-off. The students are never bored – they are laughing, empowered, working together to help each other learn, and inviting their friends to attend classes with us next time. Win-win-win.

Then, in my advanced classes I get to teach all kinds of fun and playful things, like playful, smooth, and surprising ways to switch roles mid-dance, steals, etc, because everyone in the advanced class already understands at least the basics of both roles. In my advanced lindy class (currently taught in collaboration with the amazing John Lozano) we are able to move through material extremely quickly, and you can just feel the energy and excitement in the room as people light up about their learning. It’s awesome.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

“Slightly-less material for greatly-deeper learning and increased retention is a totally worthwhile trade-off.” I’m totally on the same page. I think that teaching both roles to everyone is a really huge step forward that addresses the same core issue. It teaches both initiating and responding skills to everyone. And it’s an easier concept to grasp than equal-opportunity connection. I say, “Yay!”

Anna

Rebecca,
I completely agree with your opinions as regards this issue in Lindy Hop… As a beginner dancer, I haven’t spent much time yet in the lindy hop community, but these sexist messages are quite clear and obvious to me.
In one of the comments, you mentioned that you “can initiate extremely complex movements entirely from the follow’s side”, which is really interesting to me. I would love it if you could explain or show how this is done in one of your videos :) In class, I’ve only been taught how to “follow” and “be responsive”, and ‘leaders’ are the only ones to iniciate the movements…

Nigel

BRILLIANT, Rebecca!! I’m amazed how much negativity there is here. I find it so much more FUN when I listen to the follows I’m dancing with (the conversation analogy is something I’ve thought about for a while)!! Trying to force a follow to do something without giving them space to breathe is just going to destroy the connection, momentum, or at least the mood, of the dance.

When I dance with a less experienced follow, this allows me to interpret his/her variations and respond to them with something different than I had originally thought of.

Oh, wait…. also…

When I dance with a more experienced follow, this allows me to interpret his/her variations and respond to them with something different than I had originally thought of.

This provides a challenge, leads to fun new experiences, and emphasizes the differences between each partnership.

If you’re looking for a place to start, I suppose that one could use some steps like this in a beginner class:
1) teach variations to a move (ex. whether a lead/follow faces back, forward, or sideways on the “5” of a swing out)
2) have each partner try the different variations without telling each other which they’re doing
3) then in a social dance setting: the two partners listen to each other; figure out which variations fit the best; determine which variation their partner favours; try to match their partner’s favourite variation to make it a “smoother” dance

I still remember the time a follow told me (after a blues dance) that she loved that I would let her momentum carry me farther than I might otherwise go. In actual fact I was wearing leather soles for the first time, and felt I was sliding all over the place, but I didn’t let her know. :-) I just took it as a brilliant new idea to try again.

Thanks for bringing this issue up, Rebecca!!

Anonymous

If we’re mid dance and I suddenly decide, as a lead, that I want to respond for a while, should I just stop leading? How does that work?

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

Think about it like this: You’re in a conversation and you’ve been talking a lot. You want to hear what the other person has to say. What do you do? You ask a question, and then you listen very closely to the answer.

There are a lot of ways to do this is partner dancing, assuming your partner has something to say. You could “quiet down” your dancing and observe your partner visually and /or through the connection, then match what they are doing. You could initiate a somewhat ambiguous movement, and see how they interpret it. You could initiate a simple movement very lightly and see what happens.

When you “ask a question” in dancing, sometimes your partner has only one-word answers. Follows are taught to be “yes women,” not to have our own ideas. Some break the mold, though. You could also try this with a beginner follow. Or a follow who normally leads. They do all sorts of things outside the box, so it will be easier to go into listening mode.

Anonymous

I’m confused. In your first suggestion, what do you mean by “quiet down”? In your other two suggestions, you are saying I should initiate still, but I want to respond, not initiate.

If I try it with a beginner follow (or one who normally leads), how will they know I am wanting to respond, not just leading badly?

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

I think you may be stuck in the lead mindset of “How do I make people do things?” You don’t make people do things. You ask. You open up space for the possibility to transition.

As I said above, “When you ‘ask a question’ in dancing, sometimes your partner has only one-word answers. Follows are taught to be ‘yes women,’ not to have our own ideas.”

Most follows don’t know how to initiate much. When you ask for something your partner can’t do well, you’re going to get a confusing (or non-existent, or boring) answer. Trying to initiate a movement with a partner who doesn’t respond well is just as hard as trying to respond to a partner who doesn’t know how to initiate.

That’s why I suggested sharing the initiating & responding. It’s much easier than trying to do only one at a time. You go back and forth, rather than just ceasing the conversation and hoping they pick it back up.

If you happen to be dancing with someone who knows how to initiate everything (incredibly rare for follows), then the same basic idea applies: Ask. They will be more likely to become very active. They can also take the reigns whenever they like, if you happen to be responsive. New follows and follows who normally lead tend to contribute a lot, either by accident or by habit.

Oh, and “quieting down” means doing more subtle movement.

Anonymous

I guess I still don’t get it. It seems like I still have to initiate everything, even getting my partner to initiate something is initiated by me from how I understand your reply, but from everything else I’ve read on this page, it seems that if we are to be equal and the follow can choose to be the initiator, then I should be able to choose to be the responder, if that’s how I feel?

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

@anonymous – I don’t think you’re missing anything. If your partner wants to initiate, and you give them the chance, they will. If they don’t, then you don’t have to dance with them again. You’re not entitled to be the responder with everyone, just as I’m not entitled to be the initiator with everyone. We ARE entitled to respect. I think you understand that loud and clear. Are you trying to make a point?

http://www.dancekepler.com Max Kepler

One way to cue lead/follow role exchange is varying your “tone,” (meaning your muscle tone, especially in the frame/legs). I think this may be part of what Rebecca is referring to when she uses the metaphor to “quiet down” in your dancing.

If you reduce your tone to less than your partner’s, you become the follower. This happens almost automatically through the connection because by relaxing your tone and paying close attention to the tactile feedback at your points of physical connection with your partner (hands, hand/arm, hand/back, arm/arm, etc), you will be able to respond quite readily to your partner’s movements.

If you increase your tone to greater than your partner’s, you are leading. Your partner will have an easier time readying and responding to your movements. Similarly, your partner can increase his or her tone to greater than yours to take over the lead, or reduce his or her tone to less than yours to suggest that you take the lead.

This system works for me immediately 95% of the time (and closer to 100% when I am dancing with someone who already knows both roles). The other 5% can look pretty comical – with both partners getting more and more relaxed and floppy and waiting for the other to initiate with looks of bewilderment – or with both partners getting more and more exhausted by trying to increase tone enough so the other person reads their intention to initiate.

When I find myself in one of these two degenerative scenarios, I usually step up (in the first scenario) or tone down (in the second). I also usually reduce the frequency with which I dance with that partner. If my partner is someone relatively new to dance, I try to cut her or him some slack for only knowing how to initiate or only knowing how to respond, but not initiate. However, when it’s someone who’s been dancing for a long time, I may choose to decline future dances with that person for at least a few months.

All rounder

The solution to the problem is this: there is no problem actually. These are the rules of the game. You need a leader to decide about the direction of the movement and a follower to quickly respond to this decision. That’s simply how the dance works. Gender is irrelevant. You come to the decision that there is inherently some sort of sexism in the distinction of these two roles through an obvious logical fallacy. Many others have noticed that in previous comments but you don’t seem prone to taking other peoples’ view into consideration when it contradicts yours.

What you suggest is rather theoretical and in practice it’s impossible. There is no way that you can have both dancers taking decisions about the direction of the next movement at the same time. The conversation example is wrong. Letting both partners deciding about the next movement is analogous to have two people deciding about the topic of their discussion at the same time. In both cases the result is bad communication. Moreover, in a conversation we don’t both speak at the same time but in a dance we do. And that’s why we need distinctive roles.

Every dance has foundations that have been established through decades of added knowledge and experience. There is a reason why things happen. And it’s not sexism. Questioning these very foundations is at least naive. We are not talking about Lindy Hop anymore but about another dance.

To be more specific, in practice it’s impossible for a beginner leader to be able to count, listen to the music, think about the next move, control his body, take care of the follower and on top of all that to be responsive to any move the follower may initiate. But of course, if the dancers are highly skilled they can depart from their conventional roles at some points in the dance, add variations, be very creative and improvisational. But like I said that requires advanced skills and most of the times partners who know each other. And it is definitely not something new. It already happens and it doesn’t require another article to push things towards this direction on the false grounds of abolishing sexism from the dance. (Frida with Seguin at lone star this year was an excellent example of a follower perfectly “leading” in short instances of the dance. But how many Fridas are out there??)

Closing I would like to give my “example”. I think that your attempt to change how the leader and the follower work in the dance is like trying to change the players roles in a basketball game on the grounds of discrimination. I mean why is it that the centers are usually the tallest and the guards the shortest in the team? Isn’t that discriminative? But that’s how the game is played. If you don’t like it there are other sports for you…

All rounder

Sorry that was meant to reply to the main article…

Paul

“The solution to the problem is this: there is no problem actually. These are the rules of the game”

Just because there are rules, that does not mean that the rules are meant to stay static or that you can’t improve on the rules. Case in point: the rules of basketball were changed at least 50 times since the turn of the century. It was basketball in 1900. It’s still basketball in 2013.

“What you suggest is rather theoretical and in practice it’s impossible.”

You give the example of Frida doing exactly what you say is impossible. You may argue that Frida is the exception, but I argue that you just have not travelled or danced in South Korea or Slovenia. Jazz dancing is informed by jazz with (according to Dave Brubeck) is dialogue. You obviously can’t have dialogue if you are both shouting or talking at each other. There are natural breaks in speech where each person takes his/her turn. The same in jazz partner dancing. Also, not all initiation is initiation of momentum. There is also initiation of texture, of rhythm, and of sass. The dance roles give structure to the dance, kind of like the different instruments give structure to the song–e.g. the tuba hits the lows and the clarinet hits the highs–but either can initiate changes in tempo, texture, mood, etc.

“Every dance has foundations that have been established through decades of added knowledge and experience. There is a reason why things happen”.

Yes there is a reason why things are why they are, but it’s helpful to re-examine those reasons once in a while. In the 18th century, there was a reason why the colonies in North America were being taxed without them being represented. That was reconsidered. In the 1930’s there was a reason why people of different skin colors drank from different fountains. That was reconsidered. Yes, there is a reason why the person doing the lead steps traditionally appears to be doing most of the initiation of momentum, rhythm, etc. However, if you talk to or dance with Dawn Hampton (who has been dancing longer than you or I), she might have a different opinion about who’s in charge and whether or not she’s wrong about it.

“To be more specific, in practice it’s impossible for a beginner leader to be able to count, listen to the music, think about the next move, control his body, take care of the follower and on top of all that to be responsive to any move the follower may initiate”.

True. However, people are not beginners forever. You might say the same of basketball players dribbling, avoiding other players, directing the play, and watching out for who’s open. Responding is just another skill (and like all things that are worthwhile, take time to acquire).

“But of course, if the dancers are highly skilled they can depart from their conventional roles at some points in the dance, add variations, be very creative and improvisational. But like I said that requires advanced skills and most of the times partners who know each other.”

Actually, a lot of times, they don’t know each other and are just responsive to each other.

“I think that your attempt to change how the leader and the follower work in the dance is like trying to change the players roles in a basketball game on the grounds of discrimination. I mean why is it that the centers are usually the tallest and the guards the shortest in the team? Isn’t that discriminative?”

I agree that tall people usually being centers and shorter people (seriously 6’6″ is considered short) being forwards is not discriminative because it discriminates people based on their abilities. It is discriminative however if you impose that centers cannot take 3-point shots or jump shots, or that forwards cannot post up or dunk because of their respectively chosen roles.

All rounder

Paul I think that basically you agree with me. But you didn’t fully get my point. The rules may change but not the foundations. Basketball is still played with hands, and needs a ball and a basket. If you change any of these it’s no more basketball. It’s something else. Same holds for Lindy Hop. There are practical reasons why we need a Leader and a Follower. You can’t have both dancers taking decision at the same time. That’s my point. You can’t fully share “leadership” of the dance. Decisions about the next move can’t be split 50-50 as Rebecca suggests. If you manage to do this it’s no more Lindy Hop, it’s something else. Gender is irrelevant.

So, that is what I find impossible. But obviously I do believe it’s still possible to leave space to the follower to be creative. And that already happens to a great extent. That’s why I gave the example of Frida. But you see still even in this dance Michael is clearly the Leader and Frida the Follower. They can’t both be leaders at the same time. Frida is very intelligent to know that she can’t initiate a move when Michael is trying to do that. But still she can be very creative and even initiative at a few times. And that’s wonderful.

Please do not neglect that we are talking about a social dance. And most of the people just need a simple context with in which they can easily enjoy their dances. Being social means being simple. And that’s what roles guarantee. Simplicity and practicality.

My ending point is that these “rules” already exist. There is nothing to change. Followers can be creative, initiative at certain instances and improvisational. Frida is an example (not the only one). So, this discussion is just pointless. Especially when it is based on the false grounds of sexism.

Finding ways to enforce followers initiative and leaders responsiveness in a dance is a totally different subject.

Paul

I think we agree on a lot of things, but there may be confusion as to what we actually disagree upon. I don’t disagree that there should be a follow role or lead role. In the Frida and Michael example, Frida is clearly doing the follow steps in the swing out and Michael is clearly doing the lead steps in the swing out. And this is perfectly fine lindy hop. What I am arguing for is that the *ideas for movement* not all originate from the one performing the lead role. Ideas for movement encompass things like texture, rhythm, line, etc.

Here’s an example of a good dance that could be better if the lead listened a little more. The follow looks like she is hanging on for dear life and the lead, even though he has good lines and good ideas, a lot of times just disregards what the follow has to say. Here on the other hand, we have two people having a conversation. See for example in 0:38, the follow initiates a continuous spin by keeping her right arm tucked in so she can continue rotating. The lead listens to the follow’s idea to delay connection for a bit, and they hit something in the music that sounds better than if she had stopped rotating earlier.

“There is nothing to change”. This I feel is a limiting thought. You can always improve something.

“So, this discussion is just pointless. Especially when it is based on the false grounds of sexism.” I do think some people overdo the sexism label, but in this case it would at least behoove people to take a closer look since from the outside, it appears dance roles are gender based (e.g more women follow, and more men lead). It’s like saying there is no sexism in schools for STEM subjects. Sure, people are free to do chose what they want, but there is underlying social pressure (lack of support, ridicule, patronizing attitudes) for female students who take an interest in science and engineering.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

“You can’t have both dancers taking decision at the same time.” But you can share back and forth, can’t you? You can initiate 2 beats, and then see what I do with it. I can initiate 4 beats and let you take over for a few. This is what actually happens on the dance floor. Every follow will do a swing out differently. If you’re not responding to the actual results you’re getting, that’s just bad dancing.

We screw everything up by expecting leads and follows to initiate and respond in isolation. That is HELLA hard. People dance differently! Unless your follow is a robot, they are initiating something. Listening is imperative.

Anyhow, you may be interested in my next post, where I directly answer your concerns.

Jason

> in practice it’s impossible for a beginner leader to be able to count, listen to the music,
> think about the next move, control his body, take care of the follower and on top
> of all that to be responsive to any move the follower may initiate.

Yes, yes, a thousand times yes. Can I see that “impossible” underlined a few times please?

So much of the conversation above seemed to be targeted at people who can do all those things at once. Frankly, those advanced dancers are probably already leading and following.

I have felt so criticised in the comments for not doing something I’m incapable of doing at my stage of dancing. I *know* I’m not listening to the follow as much as I should. But if I did, I’d have to stop doing something else. Probably breathing.

http://rebeccabrightly.com Rebecca

Just because it’s hard is no excuse for not teaching it, or not learning it. Beginner dancers are already asked to do the impossible. I call it extreme multi-tasking. And beginners constantly amaze me at what they are able to juggle at once, though they often think they are terrible at everything.

I’m sad that you feel criticized. Perhaps you should consider that’s how follows feel. We get dirty looks from new leads all the time when we do something unexpected. Or we get bored looks for not doing something interesting.

Perhaps you haven’t practiced responding skills in isolation. Try it, like you’d work on a swing out in isolation, or your initiating skills in isolation. This is how dancers practice. Then you try adding more things together, and see what you can juggle. It’s not something you’re expected to get overnight like Cinderella. It’s a process, but you have to start somewhere, and preferably early.

Men in our society are expected to handle everything perfectly, and direct the entire dance! Doesn’t that suck? If you learn to share the control, it can be a weight off your shoulders.